Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-103.-1-19.2SCAi~ 1" = 80' TEST HOLE EL. 21 5 1,5' DARK BROWN SANDY LOAM 2,0' BROWN LOAMY SiLT DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS: PROVIDE STORAGE FOR 100 S OF A 2 INCH RAINFALL EOR IMPERVIOUS AREAS PRO'~DE 15 ~, STORAGE OF A 2 INCH RAiN FOR PERMIASLE SURFACES US[ 10 FOOT DIAME~R PRECAST CONCRETE DRAINAGE STRUCTURES RATED AT 68.42 CF/VF DEPTH CONC. CURB DETAIL SI REV, NO. DATE ITEM I ~/'~l/oo P-.~.V ^~ PEP. P.J_A P--~V A~ PJ~F~ R.L_A I~Ev A~ PE~-. ~d..PH~ 4./o4/,~1 USE (2) 10 FOOT DIAMETER BY 10 FOOT EFFECTIVE DEPTH POOLS, 20 VF TOTAL DEPTH ~ D [~IGTIN~ ~INC~L~ FAMLy B~-~IPENE~ SYSTEM 'G" CA. = 5,250 :~ SF ~ [ MAX ¢,~LJJ~R ~:~P NLMC~R ,, ~ ~ PA~ 5TA~ ~1~ ~ ~ ~ TIE ~AININ~ ASPHALT PAVING SPEC'S ,' .a. I -<~-o~ G - I ' "~ J H ~ ~.. TOW.~, ~F SOUTHOLD J ~ 2,~OO GALLON SEPTIC TANK DETAIL ] ~ ENT ~ PaDL TO 'E " '~. : * a ~*~ I ~ HYDRAULIC PRBF]LE TASTING DARN SYSTEH , ,. 0 ' 5,250 SF X 2/12 X 100% = 8925 ± CF STORAGE REQUIRED ' USE (2) 10 FOOT DIAMETER BY 10 FOOT EFFECTIVE DEPTH POOLS, 20 V~ TOTAL DEPTH SANITARY CALCULATIONS: ./ 4' I,I WATER MAIN ISDLATIDN DETAIL SERVICE D~TAIL TYpIGAL WAT~ Water lines t!~ust be Inspected by !he Suffolk County Dept. of He.alth 8ervloes. Call 852-2100, 24 hours m advance, to schedule inspection(s). SUFFOLK COUNIY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICe APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION ONLY This JpprovaJ is granted for the constmctian of dL~pesal and water supply facilities ? of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code and is not an expressed nor implied epproval to discharge from ot occupy the s/mclure(s) shown. THIS APPROVAL EXPtRES THR. EE (3) APR1 DATE SIGNATURE 5 ~ f D DRwo. BY: V.A:B. r FILE , SCALEr SCA : = 8UFFOI~ OOUN'I'~ DEPARI~,~IT OF HEALTH APPROVEO FOR GONSTRU~ION QNLY '~h~ approval ~ granted f~r the ~ns~lon dispos~ and ~ ter suppN faclt~i~ pmua~ to 7 of the 8~olk Coun~ 8anl~ C~e andls r nor Implied' approval to dl~ha~e ~m or ~u~ structure(s) 'shown. THIS APPROV~ EXP/RE8 *THREE, YEARS FROM-~E DATE BE[OW,~ .., i--.. SCA;Lr: ,CHK. BY: PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS K~NNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD June 12, 2001 Mr. Robe~ Lund Robe~ Lund Associates 4829 East Lake Harriet Parkway Minneapolis, MN 55409 Re: Peconic Bay Winery SCTM#1000-103-1-19.2 & 19.11 Dear Mr. Lund: The following resolution was adopted by the Southold Town Planning Board at a meeting held on Monday, June 11, 2001: BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board authorize the Chairman to endorse the final surveys, last revised April 4, 2001. Conditional final approval was granted on March 12, 2001. All conditions have been fulfilled. Enclosed please find two copies of the approved site plan; one for your records and one to be submitted to the Building Department when you apply for a building permit. Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding the above. Very truly yours, Chairman encls. cc: Tax Assessors, Building Dept. BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD 2001 Mr. Robert Lund Robert Lund Associates 4829 East Lake Harriet Parkway Minneapolis, MN 55409 Re: Peconic Bay Winery SCTM~1000-103-1-192 & 19.11 Dear Mr. Lund: The following resolution was adopted by the Southold Town Planning Board at a meeting held on Monday, March 12, 2001: The final public hearing, which was held at 6:15 p.m., was closed. The following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, this proposed site plan, to be known as site plan for the Peconic Bay Winery, is to construct a 10,515 square foot winery building; and WHEREAS, Lavcor Agricultural is the owner of the property known and designated as Peconic Bay Winery, Route 25, Cutchogue, SCTM#1000-103-1-19.2 & 19.11; and WHEREAS, a formal application for the approval of this site plan was submitted on September 22, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617, declared itself lead agency and issued a Negative Declaration on March 12, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals granted a building width variance on December 7, 2000; and C O Peconic Ba_v Wine~_ - Paue Two - March 13, 2001 WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Committee has approved the elevation drawings on February 27, 2001; and WHEREAS, this site plan, dated January 31, 2001, was certified by the Building Inspector on March 8, 2001; and WHEREAS, the applicant hereby agrees and understands that if the site plan which receives stamped Health Department approval differs in any way from the proposed conditional site plan on which the Planning Board held a public hearing and voted on, then the Planning Board has the right and option, if the change is material to any of the issues properly before the Planning Board, to hold a public hearing on this "revised" site plan application and review its conditional approval; and WHEREAS, on March 12, 2001 the applicant signed a statement agreeing not to object to a new public hearing and Planning Board review of the revised application; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to Chapter 58, Notice of Public Hearing, has received affidavits that the applicant has complied with the notification provisions; and WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Site Plan Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; be it therefore RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant conditional final approval on the surveys, dated January 31, 2001, subject to fulfillment of the following condition. This condition must be met within six (6) months of the resolution: 1. Review by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services. Enclosed please find a copy of the Negative Declaration for your records. Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding the above. Very truly yours, Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman encls. ~ SITE PLAN mis.ion conference (within Complete application received (within 4 months (Within 10 dnys of receipt) Applicant ~dvised (within 30 days Revised submission received ~ 'A gency C°°r dinalio REFERRED TO. Board of Trustees Department (certification) '~ C°unw Department of Planog' ~partment°fTransp°rtati°n.Stat; Department or Transportation ~~nt ~ ~U Y Dept. of Ilealth ~p~ ]~) ~ Commissioners ECE I VED: Draft Covenants and Restrictions Filed Covenants and Restrictions t"~ndscape plan ~g plan ~) Cut approval ~e~d by l:ngineer C~ 1~ ~- Approval or site p/an -Whh conditions [~ndorsement of she plan Cerdficale of Occupancy inkpecdon One Year revi ?w I>I .~.',.~'NING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR Chairman WILLIAM J CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCH[E LATHAM, JR RICHARD G WARD PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-3136 Telephone (516) 765-1938 Date Received Date Completed Filing Fee APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF A SITE PLAN New Change of Use Re-use Extension Revision of Approved Site Plan Name of Business or Site: SCTM #: Location: Address: Peconic Bay Winery - New Tastinq Barn 1000- 103 01 - 19.11 and 19.2 Route 25 Cutchogue, NY 31320 Main Road. Cutchogue. NY llQR5 (combined 7/2000) Name of Applicant: Address of Applicant: Telephone: Paul T,ow~rr~ T,axr~or ~rgric,l!t,!rR! ~ Howard Presant, Davidoff & Matito Third Avon la: q~eh Floor. Ne,:z Y~rk, (212) 557-7200 ext 282 NY 10158 Owner of Land: Agent or Pemon responsible for application: Robert Lurid. RT,A C/O Graystone Address: 2282 Montauk Highway. PO Rn'z 176R; Telephone: (631) 537-1414 or (612) 927-0680 Bridgehampton, NY 11932 Site plans prepared b¥: Jim Behrendt - Burton Behrendt Smith P.C. License No, 049378 Address: Telephone: 244 East Main ~t. ro~f.: p~hngn~, NY 11772 (631) 475-0349 AUG 0~ '00 iS~O1 FF' HIGHLAND PARTNERS £0~S~d ~02~ ~9e 212 ?13 1202 TO 91Gi2~,u.~02 P.05/06, APDUCANDS .,~%:tOAVIT ST/~FE OF N~W YORK OOUNI'~' OF SUFF~)LK tn I;he St~e of New York and ~l~st, I'to J' Lh~~ ()wfl~f of ~h~ ~bOv~ prop~r~Y, or thaL he ls ~e which is heref~J making appllc~I;Ion; Ll~:at me;e are no eXlSdl~g structures or improvements on the land which ~1'~ no[ shown on ~ Sl~e ptnn: thaL Ule tJ[l~ ~' ~e ~ri:tj¢~ pBr~J, Including alt ~gl~-o¢-waY, has been clearly es~b[JSh~ aha Is shown on said Pia~; ~J~gt ~o p~ ~ ~e Plan Infringes upon 8ny duly ~IGQ pl~n wh[~ has not D~en 2bahdoneO bot,h ~s to [<)t~; ~nd asto roads; that h~ has ex, mined 2[i fu~s ~d regu~aUons adopted uy me ptannlng Board for ~h~ filing oF'$~e Pjan~ and ~11 comply WIL~ s~m, Dials SUb ~d, 8s approved, will no[ be altered or d~snged In any manner wlmom me approvsI Planntng Board; and ~a~ the actual pt~vslcai improveme~ wl~l ~ Ins~tled tn pl2!~s subJ~ed, IN~ Public, State of NeW Y~fl~, · No, 0~GR6021013 (:~nm~o~ I~xp r~ Mar~ u~, ~-.t, Page 3 P~annlng Board Site Plan Application 2"7_(~R1 ar-[T~lLandAreaofSite(acres°rsquarefeet)(5.684 acres in B zone; 21.347 acres in R-80 R-80: B _Zoning District 6 uses Existing Use of Site Winery, Tasting Barn, Farmstand, R~_sldence, Storage, 6 uses Proposed Uses on Site. Show all uses prop@sed.and existing Indicate which building Vineyard will have which use. If more than one use is proposed per building, indicate square footage of floor area that will be reserved per use 1 - New Tasting Barn(13,712 s.f.); 2 Existinq Wine Productio_n~2,415 s.f.); 3 - Existing Farm Stand (575 s.f.); 4 - Existinq Storage~ 3/~s-3,067 s.f.); 5 - Existinq Farmhouse, unoccupied (Future Restaurant in Phase II, 1,300s.f.) 6 - Existinq Vineyard (approx 24.2 acres) ~LO 11~-- Gross FIoor Area of Existing Structure(s) (7 existing structures) 13,~712 --OrossFIoorAreaofProposedStPdcture(s)(6 existing and 1 new! 7.2% Percent of Lot Coverage by Building(s) (all buildings in "B" zone) 24.8% Percent of Lot for Parking (where app[icable) ( all in "B" zone) 68.0% Percent of Lot for Landscaping (where applicabie) (excludes R-80 vineyard area) Has applicant been granted a variance and/or special exception by Board of Appeals - Case # & date Board of Trustees - Case # & date NY State Department of Environmental Conservation - Case # & date Suffolk County Department Health Services - Case # & date Case Number Name of Applicant Date of Decision Expiration Date Other Will any toxic or hazardous materials, as defined by the Suffolk County Board of Health, be stored or handled at the site? if so, have proper permits been obtained? Name of Issuing agency Number and date of permit issued. NO ACTION (EXCAVATION OR CONSTI~UCTION) MAY BE UNDERTAKEN UNTIL APPROVAL OF $17E PLAN BY PLANNING BOARD. V/OLATO£S AI~E SUBJECT TO PROSECUTION AUG 03 '00 18:0~ FR HIc~qND PARTNERS 212 ?15 12~2 TO · 29270382 P. 05/06 eorparatlo,~); DB~CI~IPT~ON OF II~',I,A?ION~II!I' HOU-28-20~3~ 1.5::.0 516 4~5 l~'/ P.8Sxl8 Stat~ Envi[o~mema[ Quali',~ Review FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM The full [AF is intended ~o p~avid¢ ~ me~hod whgreby aDD:teEn,s'and ~n~S cBn be assured th~ the determination L DETFRMINATION OF 51GN!FICANCE--TyDe I and Ugiis',ed Actions information, an~ considering both the ~agltud~ ~nd importance of each impact..~ is reasonably deter?ned.by the [e~d agency th~c: A The 0~ojec[ ~il hoc ~suit m any ta~e and impor[n~t ~mp~ct[~} and~ the~etore, is one which will h~ve a significant imDac[ O~ the enw~anmen[, therefore · negative decl~ra6o~ will be B Altho~,~h the pro}act could h~ve a signifY[cant effect 0n :he env~ronmen:, there will no[ be a si~n~fican~ effect for ~h~s Un~ted Action because (he mitigation measare~escribed in PART3 have been required, therefore · CON01TIONED ~eSatlve dedaratio~ will be C. The ~r~jeCt m~V tesuk in one Or more ]area and.lm,portanc.impac~.th~mav have ~ ~Jgnificant impact · A Conditioned Negative Oeclaration is .o~iY vBfld, fOr'UnJisted Actions ___ Peconic B~y Winery - Neu Tas~inq Barn Signdture c~l PrcDarer {If diffcrcm from ~;~ponsible oiiicef--~ Prepa. red by Project 5pons~ 31320 Main ROad, Cu~chOgU~, ~ 11935 Robert L~...-~A A~ch~tects I_ (R~. 5~?-lAln .__ C/O Grayst~ne Builders !282 Mon%auk H~hwa~, PO Box lT~8~re . c,r~c NY 1 ~ 93 2 Paul 5owerre -LaVcor Agricultural, Inc. ~ 1 2~2 55~,72Q0 ex~ ' 28z C/O Howard ~re~n~,~avidof: & Mall%o, 605 Third Ave, 34~...~1oor c~0 ~ , 10158 New York ~~ Construction of ~ new !0,259 sq. f~. Tastin9 Barn wi~h offices, and M=~zage. R~moval Of the ex~st.n~ 2,459 sq. f~. Ta~ing Barn with Offices and ~tora~e. Removal of %he existing gravel parking 1~ and construction of a new asphml~ parking lo~. A. Site Description Ph~iCai ¢ettln8 o( cvefaJ] pro~ect, both Ceve[oped and u~develo~ed area~, 1. ~esem; [a~d use: ~Urban ~ ndu~tri~; ~Commercia~ ~.;dend~l (suburban) ~Rur~[ (non-far O~o~e~~ ~Agricultu~e .~Other.__ APPROXIMATE ACR~AG5 PRESENTLY AFTER COMPLETION Me~dow or Brushland (Ncn.~gr~cul:u~l) acre~, ac~s ~. Wh~( ii deo(h ~0 b~d~ock~ N.A. _ (Em fcc() 9 Who; ,s fi~e depth c~.[be wzte~ ~abie~ ~{,n leer) belO~ grade at proposed building ~. Name o~ 5(team and name o~ River ;o which it is ~rlb~tary ~?. ;~ ~he site served ~y exi~tln~ ~ubllc utiH~ies~ ~Yes aJ ff Ye~, does sufficient'c~PaciW exist ~o · }:) i~ Ye~, will improvements be neces~ar7 ~o allow connecdon~ OYes 15. 1~ the site located in an a~ricultura( ~is~rict cerdflcd pursuant t6 Agriculture and Marke.~ Law, A~ti~le 2~-AA, SecUon ~3 ~nd 304~ ~Yes ~No O~own ~f ~he ~CL, ar, d 6 NYCRR 6177 ~Y~s 20. H~ the site ever been used to'r :he O{sposai of solid or hazardous wus~?. ~Yos ~No . project Descdplion a..Total egntiauous acreage owned or controlled by p'(oieer sponsor ,53. ~87, acres. b. PrejecC acreage to be develo~d~ 27,0~[ acres initially; 53. 187 acre~ ultin~atcly, d Length of p~oiec~, m miles: _:_. 138 . {ff amDrnt)rla e) ~~" f. Nu~b(~r Of oFf.street p~rk[~ ~ces existing: ~DDrQx 30; ~rcpr~sed ~ st~l~ ~1~ ~ over~lo~ h. If rcsldentiel: Number and Wp(' ~f hnusinli Hnits: On(. Famdy Tw. ~amlly Ultimately .... i, Olmonsion~ [i~ ~oe~.~ o( iarges~ I)ropc~¢ed S.truciure . 3B ' height: 7~ ' NOU-28-2:~DO :S~I 516 425 125~ P,11/18 7 If m~hi-phi~ed. d. Is ph~e 1 ~unc~on~l!y de~emdcn~ 0n ~ubS~quen[ phases? OYes ~Nc 10. ~umber o~ ~oos eliminated Oy this projec[ 0 . ~. ff ye~. :ndic~t~ ~yDe O~.wa~ (5ew~. industrial, ~c,~ and 13. Is subsufiaze IquiC was.~e d.s~os~l i~volved? ~Yes ~No Type _ ' , '15. I'S project or 3n'/ po~ Of project located in t 100 v.ar Hood pl~in! OYes ~No ~5. Will the proje¢~ generate solid w~e~ ~es ONe paper and other recyclables 17. WiH ~h~ project involve the disposal et ~olid waste? ~Yes ~No ' a. I~ ye~, What is the antieipa{e~ rate o~ disposal? (on~/month. b, If yes, what is ~he anticipated ~ito life/ 18. will pr~jec~ glo herbicides or pes¢icides~" ~es ~N~) 19. Will.project rouLinely prddu~o odors [more than omi hour [,(~r day)( ~Yes 21. Wil~ project -:sUIt in an i~crc~t~ in cr,,:~gy u~c~ ~Ye~ ~N~)' ~2. I[ wa:er ~,Upl~l¥ i~ from w~ll~, indicau~ Ugmpm~ cap.~citv _ 12 23, Total a.llicig~ed wnt~r u~ag~: per day .~. gali~rl~/~ay. I'[ YeL CXpla{~ ._ _ (. 5i6 425 1257 : Site Plan ~chitect~ ~eview P. 12/18 '~all/200 T~wn Trustees, Public 0fflcfals 20~ NYSDOT, NYSDEC raZZ/200 _Bureau ATF ~ C. Zoning and F{annmg Information 1. CozS proposed actian involve a ~lanning or zoo. lng decision? , ~f Ye~, indicBte dec. imo~ requ~r~o ~subdiw~ion I~ ice plan nother What is the zon,r,8 cl~ssiiiratlon(s)of ~he siteff B a~d R-80 ...... wh~t is/the m~ximu~ potential developmen~ of the site if d~eloped as permitted by the pr~ent What is the prSposed zon/n~ of the si~e? ~ and ~-80 ~no c~a~ge) _ _. wh~ ;s ;h~ maximum ;otentlal development of the si~e if develoDed ns Dffrmh~d by the DroDos~d zonln~ ..... ~/1~ 6. IS the oroposro ~¢cion cOnsi.~tent with thC recommended uses in adopted locar land use plan~ ~Yes 6. t~ tad propo~¢~ afdon compatible with ad~oinir~/~urroundlnff land ~se~ within a ~ m;le~ ~Ye~ 9. If the proposed 3ct(ca ts the fubdiviSlon Of Incd, how many tots are proposed~ a. Wha~ is ;he minimum Io( size proposed~ _ . 10, Will prbpOsed ~ction require any ~uthorizadonfs) for the formation off.er er ~vater distric~ OYes ]~, Will t~e proposed ardon c~eate a ~c~And for ~ny cammuni~ provided.services (recreation, education. fire protect on); ~Yes a. If y~, is existin~ ~ap~cKy su[ficien( to hand[e projected dcmand~ ~ ~Ne ' 1~. Will th{ proposed act;on result in thc generation of traffic significantly ~bove present leveJs~ ~Yes ~Nc a. I[ yes. is the existing road ne(work adequate to handle thc additional tralfirf ~Yes ~No D. Informational Details :void them. NO~.~28--2CdF40 15:*-2 516, 425 125'7 P.13/18 Part 2--~OJFrCT IMPACT, AN. THEIR M~ITUDE Responsibility o~ lead Agency In compiaUn~ ~e form ~e rev[ewer should be auide~ by ~e question: Have my res~nses and determinations r~anablel The reviewer is not expired to be sn expert environmental anal?st, Idenu~ln~ that an impact will be poten[l~lly large (column 2) does not mean that k is also necessarily Any I~e impac~ mull be evaluated in PART 3 to ~ete~ine significance, Ide~fyJn~ ~n impact in column 2 simply a=k~ that it be looked a~ further. The E~amples pra~ded =re ~o assist the reviewer by showin~ Wpes of impac~ and wherever possible the threshold of magnitude ~ would trigier a re=pon~ in column 2. The e~mples are ~enerally applicable ~rou~hout tbs Sel~ end for most sJtu~figns, But, tot eny ~geciti¢ project or site o~r examples end,or lower {h~es~lds may be for = Potential Large impact response= thus r~uirinE evaluation in Pa~ 3, The i~pacts of each project, on each ~ite, in esch [~a~iW, will w~, Therefore. the exampl~ are ill~a~ive and have been offered ~ ~uidan~, They do not c~s~tute =n exhau~ti~ list of im~ ~d ~msh~ds m answer each The number of examples per question doe= not indica~ ~e impedance of esoh question. In ~enfifyin~ impac=, consider Ion~ =erin, short term a~ cuml~Uve offs=. t~t~uetlons [Read carefu}iy} Answer eech ~{ the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any impact. Maybe answe~ should be considered as Ye~ answers. if answeri~ Yel to * question ~n check ~e appropriate box (column 1 =r 2) to indicate the potential ~ize o~ the impact. If [mpac[ ~hres~[~ equaJ~ or exc~ds any example provide: check ¢o~um. 2. If im~ct will occur but ~re~hold is ~ower than example, ch~k column 1~ if reviewer has doubt about size of ~e impact then consider the impa~ as ~mndallv la~e and proc~d to PART If a potentially large impure checked in column 2 can be mifieamd by chan~) in the preie=t to a ~mall to modera~ impa¢~ ~Jso check [he Yes boz in column 3. A No response J~dica[es that such a reduction is not paulus. Thk mu~t be explained in Part 3. IMPACT ON LAND 1. Will the propo',ed actior~ resul: in a physical change to the project sitar laNO ."lyes E~amples that would apply to column 2 · Any ¢onst~ctlo~l ~n slope~ Of 15% or ~ter, (15 foot rise per 1~ foot of lengthL or whom the general slo~s in the project area e~c~d 10~. * C0n~tructlon on }and where the depth to ~he water :able is less than 3 ~eet. e Construction o~ pave~ parkin~ ama for 1,0~ or more v~ieles. e C~n~tmcden an ~and whom bedrock is ex~sed or generalJy within 3 feet of exiflin8 gro~and sure,ce. e Conflrucfion that w~ll continue for more :~an 1 year or involve mote e Ex:ovation for mmin~ purposes that wou~d remove more then runs of na~rM material (Lo., rock or so[t) per ye~. * Cons~uction or expansi~ of a san~ta~ landfill. e Con,traction in a de~igna:ed tl~dway. ' O~er imaac= 2. Will there be an effect t~,, .,~y unique or unusual land forms found on the alter [i.e,, cliffs, dunes, 8aolojlical formations, etc,)lNO r~yE$ * Specific land forms: ___ . Small to Potential Can Impact Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change O O OYea O* 0 OYes O~o 0 0 OYes ~ 0 ~Ye~ 0~o ~ ~ ~Ya Wi~ prop~e~ ~c~ion ~ffec~ any water body ~e~i~na~ ~nder Articles ~ 5.24, 25 of the Environmental Conservafi=n Law. ECL] ~NO Ezamples that wou;d appiy to column 2 De~lopa0ie area of site conta,ns a pro~ected water body. Oredglni m~re tha~ ~00 cubic g~r~ ~f material from channel of a protecte~ s~rea~. ~xte~s~oe ~f ~tiliw ~i~.:b~:ion f~cilide~ thr~ug~ a prote~ water body. Conl:ru:tio~ i. ~ de,ignored freshwater ar hda~ wetland. Other impa~s: ,, ._. 4. Wi!I pt~posec~ action affect any non-protected existing ar new body o~ waterl iiNO t'"1 y ES ' A 10% increase or eecrease in the surface area ol any body of water or mare than a 10 acre ~ncrease or decrease. · Construction of a body ef water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area. , Other impacts: __ $. Will Proposed ACtion affect surface or groundwater quality Or quantity/' nNO ~IYES EaampJes [h~t would apply to column 2 Pmp~d Actia~ wt[I ra~u~e a discharge permit, P~epe~ed A¢tion r~u~tes u~e of a source of water that does not have approval to ~erve proposed (prOject) action. Propped ~ction ~u~res water supply from weH~ w~th areater than 45 ~allons ~r minute pumping C~DaCJ:Y Co~st~u¢tion ~r operation caustna ~ny contamin&tion of a water ~upply system. Propos~ A~io~ w~ll adversely affect aroundwater. Liauid effluent wiJi ~ :onveyed off ~e site m facilities which presently do not exist ~r h&ve inadequate capacity PropoJed Action would use water in excess of 20,~0 gallons per day. Proposed Action ,vil~ ~ikely ca~e siltstion or other discharge into an existin~ ~dV of water to t~a extent that the~e will be ~n obvious visual congra~t to natura~ conditio~. Proposed Action ~lJl reauite the storage of petroleum or chemlcai products greater th~a 1.1~ ~allons. Pro,sad Action will allow re~l u~es in areas without water Proposed Actio~ locates commercial end,or Industrfai uses which may r~uire new or expansion of existing waste trea~nen~ and/or srora&e facilities. ' Other impac~:~ 6. Will proposed action alter drainale flow or patterns, or surface water runoff~ INO r~Y£5 £~ample~ that would apply :o column 2 · Proposed Action would change flood water flows. 7 Moderate Impact [] [] [] · 0 516 425 125'7 P. 14,"18 Potential Can Impaot Be La.'ge MItlgatecI By Im~ct Project Change ~Yes ~No ~Yes GYe, G ~Yes 0 ~Yes ~No D OYe ~No ~ ~Yel ~No ~ GYe~ ~Na NOU-2S--2~O 25: L~ · ?roposeo Action may cause substantial erosion. · Propo~e0 A:tion i~ incompatible with existinf draina&e patterns. · Propose~l Action will allow develoDrnent in a dose&noted floodway · Other impacts: ....... IMPACT ON AIR 7, Will p~pesed action aifect. ' Examples that would ~pply to cotumn 2 · Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trigs in any given "hour. · Proposed ActiOn will result ie the incineration of more than '1 ton of refuse per hour. · Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed 5 lbs. per hour or a heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. · Proposed action wilt allow an Increase in the amount of land co'mitred to industrial use. · Proposed action will allow an ir, crease in the density of industrial development ',vithin exiStlnf industrial areas, · Other impacts: __,, IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS $. Wi;~ Proposed Action ~ffecr any threatened or endangered spe¢iesf ~NO r~yEs E~amples tha. t would apply to column 2 · Reduction of o~,e or mote species listed on the New York or Federal list, using the site, over or near sit. e or found on the site. · gem•vol of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habita~ · Application of pesticide or herbicide more than ~wice a year, other than fOr agricultural purposes, · Other impacts: 9, Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or non-endanlere~ ~peci~f INO mYE$ E~amples that would appJy to column 2 Proposed Ac~on wou~d substantially inmrfere with any resident or mlgrato~ fish, ~hellfish et wildlife spKies. Pm~sed Action requires the removal of mote than 10 acma of mature fotefl (over 1~ years of age) or other locally important vqetation. IMPACT ON AGRICUL~RAL ~ND R~OURCES i0 Will the Ptopo~ed Action affect agricultural land r~urc~ ~NO MYES E~amgles that would apply to column 2 The pmp~od action would sever, cress or limit acc~s to agricukural land [includes cropland, havfieJds, pas:ute, vineyard, orchard, etc.) ModeT~'te Impact [] O [] [] [] O [] [] O 516 425 1257 Potential' Large Impact [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] P. 15/18 Can Ira;act Ba oye; o.o OYes •No ~Yes ONe rlye~ ~Yea ~No r-tye~ r-IN• []Yes r'lNo [~Ym [::]Yes ~-INo · Cons~tu'.tion acuvic¥ would excavate or compact the suit prgfi[e of agricut:ura~ land. * r~e proposed ac:io~ would irreverslb~¥ convert more than qo of llricukural I~nd or, if Iocat~ in an Agricultural District. more than 2.~ lcref ~J agricultural ' The pmpo~e~ action would disrupt o~ prevent ms~lJation of airicuJtur~J lan~ managemer~t sV~:em~ (e,i,, ~ubaurf~e drain l~nes, outlet ditches, ltr=~ cropping}; or create a ~eed for such mea~ure~ la;g. cause a ~arm field to drain peony dueto increas~ runoff] . Other impact: IMPACT ON AESTHETIc RESOURCES 11. Will eroposed action affect aesthetic resources? r~NO ~YES " (If necessary. ~ie the Vilull EAF Addendum in S~tlon 617.2% Appendix B.) E~mpie, that would apply to column 2 · Prapos~ land uses, or project components obv~uil? different fr~m or in sharp contrast :o current surrounding land use patee~, whether man-made ut natural · Proposed land u~es, ar proJec~ com~onen~ visible to use~ of aesthetic resource~ which will eliminate ~r significantly reduce their enjoyment of the aesthetic qu&~iUes of Lhat re.urea. · Project components that will result in the elimination or si8nificant screening of scenic views known to be important to t~ area, · Other impacts: .. IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAiiCLOGICAL RESOURCES '12. Will Proposed Aotio~ impact any site or structure of historic, ore- historic or paleontological importance~ rlNO r'lyES E3amples thee would apply to column 2 coetiiuous to any facility cr ske tasted De the 5Mte er National Register project site. Proposed Action ~tH occur m an a~ ~e~gnate~ as sensitive for archaeolo&ica~ ~ite~ o~ the NY5 O~er impacts: ~ IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 1.1. Will Proposed Actio~ affect the quanzlt~, or quality of existinl or future open ~paces or recreational opportunities? Ezamples that would apply to column 2 raND C]YE$ · The permanent foreclosure of a fu:u~ recreational oppo~nl~. · A major reduction of an open space important to :he communal. e Other impact: ~ " 9 Moaarate Impact D [] D r'l r'l [] 516 425 25? P.16/'18 Potential Can ImpaGt Be L~rge Mitigated By Iml)a~! PraleGt ~hange ~ ~Vee ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~Yes ~No CY s DN= ~ ~Yes ~No ves ~Ye~ OY. ONe N0~¢-28-2000 :'.5:24 IMPACT ON~NSPORTATION 14. will :here be an effect to exisdng transportation systems? ~NO ~YES · Prop~ied Rction will result In major traffic problems. ~ · Other impact: ~ IMPACT ON ENERGY '15 Will proposed action ~tfect the community's sources of fuel or energy suppiy~ lINC []YES Examples that would apply to column 2 any fo(m o~ energy in the municipality. · Ptopos~ Ac:ion will require the cma:ion ct ext~sion o~ an enerly transmiuion or supply sysmm ~ sewe more :hen 50 ~inele or ~o family re~idence~ or to ~erve a m~Jor commercial or indus~ial use. · Other impacts: 16, Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vib~ a~ a result of the Proposed A~ion~ ~NO E~mple~ that would apply to column 2 · Brescia8 within ~,5~ f~t of a hospital school or o~her sensitive facility. · Odors wil~ occur routinely {more ~hae one hour pet day). · Proposed Action will produce operatin~ noise exc~ing the local smblent noise le~ls ~r noise outside of structures. · Pro~os~ Ac:ion will remove natural barriers that would act e Other impacts:.,, iMPACT ON PUBLIC H~LTH 17. will Proposed Action affect public heal[h and E[ampl~ that wou~d a~ply to column ~ · Proae~e~ Action may c~use a risk of expJo~io~ or release of hazardous ~ubsta~ces (i,e. oil, ~aticide~, c~mlcah, radiation, et¢.~ accident or l~p~t ¢oodi~ens. ct there may be a chronic Iow leve~ di~ch~rie or emission. · Proposed Ac:ica may ~suJt in the burial of "h&zardous was:e¢' in any fo~m (Lo, toxic, poisono~4~, hiehly reactive, r~dioactl~, i~itatin& infectigus, otc,) · Storage facilities for one mJltion or more gaJlon~ of Ilqulf~d ga~ or other flammable li~u[ds, · P~o~ed action may result in the excavation or other di$:ur~nce wi~n 2,~ feet o~ a site used for the disOosal of salad or hazardous Moderate Impact ii 0 526 425 125T P. Potenti&l Can Imp. act a ol Large Mitigated ay'l Impact Project Change! IYas DYes ~Yes NOU-28--2~80 ;,5:!5 iMP&CT ON GAQVI~I ANn CHARACTER OF COMMUNITY ~IjI~NEiGHBORHOOD "1~, Willproposedac~.ionaffect'~hecharactaro~eexistin~jcommunity? ~mpJes that would agply to column 2 The permansnt po~uJ[tion of the city, town or village in which th~ The municipal budget for capi~l expenditures or operatin8 se~ices will incte&le by more than S% ~r year aa a ~suJt of this project Pmpos~ action will conflict with officially ados:ed plans or goals. Pr0pos~ notion wflJ cause ~ chang~ in ~e density of land use. Propos~ Action wilt replace or eliminate ex~st,lg facilities, structures or are~ of historic importance to the communit ~eveiopment witl create a demand for additional community services (La. schaets, police and fire, etc.) Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects. Proposed Action wiU create or eliminate employment. Qthe~ mmpacts:_ Moderate Impact · [] 516 425 1257 P,18/18 Potential Can Impa=t Re Large Mitigated Impa=t Project Change [] []Yes C~No F1 r-lyes rl~o [] OYes D DYes ONo DYes i-~No 1~. Is there, or ia there likely to be, public controversy related to potential adverse environmental| impactst ~NO F'1yE$ I! Any Action In Part 2 Is Identified aa a Potential Large Impact or If You Cannot Determine the Magnitude of Impact, Proceed to Part 3 Part 3--EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS Kespondbil~h, of Lead Agency Part ,1 moat be prepared if one ct more impact(s) is considered to be ~mlentially large, even if the impaq(a} may be mitipt~, Inst~etJem OJscuis the following f~r each impact identified ~n Column 2 of Part 2: 1. ~tiefly descrJ~ the impact. 2. Describe [if a~plicab~e] h~ the impact could be mitigated er reduced to a ~mafl to m~era[e impact by project 3. 8a~ed an the in~ormadon available, decide if it is reasonable to conclude that this Impact ~ important. To answer the question o~ importance, · The orobabillty of the impact occurring · The duration of the ~mpict · Itl lrreve~ibi~ity, JncludJn~ permanently (ost resources of vaJue e Whether the impact can or will ~ · The re~onal :onsequence of t~e · ~U potent~a~ divergence ~r~ I~at needs and goaJs e Whether known objecti~s m the project ~la~ to this impact, {Continue on at~ch~ents) 11 TOT~C P. 18 ; ~16-2 (2,'8 71 617.21 Apper~dix A State Environmental Quality Review FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM SEQR Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, m an orderly manner, whether a proiect or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significanc ~s not always easy to answer. Frequent- Iy. there are aspeccs of a project that are subjective or unmeasureable. It is also understood ~hat those who determine significance may have little or no tormal knowledge of the environment or may be technically expert in environmental analysis. In addiiion, many who have knowledge in one particular ~rea may not be aware of the broader concern~ affecting the question of significance. The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants'and agencies can be assured that the determination process has been orderly, comprehensive ~n nature, yet flexible to allow introduction pt information to fit a proiect or action. Full EAF Components: The full EAF is comprised of three parts: Part 1: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic proiect data, it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3. Part 2: Focuses on identifying the rangeof possible impacts that may occur from a proiect or action. It provides guidance as to whither an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it. is a pbtentially- large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be miugated or reduced. Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as poteniiaily-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is actually important. (_ DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE--Type 1 and Unlisted Actions Idenllfy the Portions of EAF completed for this p~oject: ~ Part 1 ~ Part 2 ~Part 3 Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts I and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supporting information, and considering both the magitude and importaqce of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the lead agency that: [] ^. The project will not result in any large and important impact(s) and, therefore, is one which will not have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared. [] B. Although the project could have a signii(icant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect for this Unlisted Action because (he mitigation measures, described in PART 3 have been required. therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration will be prepared.* [] C. The project may result in one or more large and .important imp~cts..that:may have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a positive deda~'ation will:be' prepared. ° A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions Peconic Bay Winery - New Tastin~ Barn Name of ^ction Name of Lead Al:enc, y Prim or Type' Name of Responsible Officer i,, Lead A :ency Title of Responsible Officer Signature of Resgonsible Officer in Lead Signature of Preparer (If different from responsible o/ricer) Oate 1 PART 1--PROJECT INFORM~ION "' Prepared bY Project Sponscrr ' NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a siRnificant effe~ on the environment Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. ,\nswers to these quesUons will be considere -as part of the application for approval and may be subiect to further verification and public revietv Provide any addition. information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3. It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be de'pendent on information currently available and will not invol,. new studies, research or mvesti§ation. I[ information requiring such ,{dditional work is unavailable, so indicate and speci; each instance. NAME OF ACTION Peconic Bay Winery - New Tasting Barn 31320 Main Road, Cutchogue, NY 11935 Robert Lund- RLA Architects AOORESS c/9 Graystene Builders 2282 Montauk Highway, PO Box 1768 STATE i ~IP CODE NY 11932 Bridgehampton NAME OF OWNER (Il ~ilteren~) ~ BUSINESS ~EL~PHONE Paul Lowerre - Lavcor Agricultural, Inc. I t 212 557-7200 ext. AOO~ESS 282 C/O Howard Presant, Davidoff & ~alito, 605 Third Ave, 34th F~oor i STATE I Z'PCCOE New York .NY 10158 OESCRIPTIONOFACT~ON Construction of a new 10,259 sq. ft. Tasting Barn with Offices, and Sterage. Removal of the existing 2,459 sq. ft. Tasting Barn with Offices and Storage. Removal of the existing gravel parking lot and construction of a new asphalt parking lot. Please Complete Each Question- Indicate N.A. il' not applicable A. Site Description Physical setting ot overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas. 1. Present land use: ~Urban ~lndustria[ J~Commercial E]Forest ]~]Agricuitmte E]Other. 2. Total acreage of project area: 2~';0~1 acres. APPROXIMATE ACREAGE Meadow pr Brushland (Non-agricultural) Forested Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, p;~sture, etc.) Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24. 25 et ECI.] Water Surface Area Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces Other (Indicate type) 3. What is predominant soil type(s) on project a. Soil drainage: ~)Well drained 100._ % of ~ite I~Poorly drain(,d % ~t sit(: [2-,,~esidential (suburban) E]Rural (non-farr PRESENTLY AFTER COMPLETION 23. 885 acres 22 · 731' acres 1.018 acres I .404 acres 2.128 acres 2.896 acres C}M<)<lerately ',veil drained O,,o of site b. If alw agricultural la,id is involved, how many acres of sod are classified within soil group I dlrough 4 of the N' Land Classification System? acres. (See 1 NYCRR 370). Unknown 4. Are there bedrock outcroppings on protect site? ~Yes ~No ~. What is depth to bedrock? N.A. (in feet) 2 ~ ,','p,proxm~ate percent.~:u of propo: ~roiect -.ie '.~'~ slop '~, [~U-I0% ~ % ~ II)-1 ,'~i5% or gre'~'~¢r _ % 6 Is project substantially contL~uous to, or contain ,-. building, site, or district, listed on the State or the National Registers of HiStoric Places? OYes ~[~No 7 - Is proiect substantially contiguous to a s~te listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks? OYes 3Z]No 8 What is the depth of the water table? ~ ..16 (in ~eet) 'below graae at proposea bu-tlaincj 9 Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquiter? ~Z]Yes 10 Do hunting, fishing or shell ~ishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? OYes 11. Does project site contain any species o~ plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered? OYes ][]No According to Identify each species 12. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the proiect site? tie.. clif~:s, dunes, other geologica.I formations) OYes x~No Describe 13. is the pFoject site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? (~)Yes ]~No if yes. explain , : 14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? O'Yes ]~No 'IS. Streams ~vithin or contiguous to pro~ect area: a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary 16. Lakes, ponds~ wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Nam~. ~. 17. [s the site served by existing public utilities? (~Yes ~]No a) if Yes, does sufficient'capacity exist to allow connection? b) If Yes. will improvements be necessary to allow connection? b Size (In acres) ][3Yes I~No OYes I~]No 18. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Marke.ts Law, Article 2S-AA. Section ,~03 ~nd 304? [~Yes [~]No U~k~ow~ 19. Is the site located in et' substantially contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 , el the ECL. and 6 NYCRR 6177 (~]Yes [~o 20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wast'~s?. ~Yes ~]No B. Project Description " 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. ,Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project spohsor '53 o 18~ b. Project. acreage to be developed: 2'7.031 acres initially; 53. ].8'7 c. Project acreage to rem'~in undeveloped ~acres. d. Length of proiect, in miles: .].38 .' (If a'~propriate)' e. If-the proiect is an expansion, indicate perc~'nt of expansion proposed ]. ,4% %; f. Number of oil-street parking }Daces existin/: aDprox 30: proposed 99' stalls plus g. Maximum vehicular trips gene. rated per hour 50 ,(upon completion o1' project)? h. If residential: Number and type o~ housing units: One Family Tw<) Family Muhit)le I'amily In;iiaily C Ultimately i. f3imensions'(in feet) of largest proposed structure _30' height; .'7~' width; 203~ length. j. Linear feet of frontage along a public thorougl~fare project will occupy' is? '730 . (t. 3 acres. acres ultimately, 38 overflow 3 Will disturbed areas be OYus ~No ~N/,\ a I~ yes for what intend._~ purpose is the site be/m: rech~imed? __ b Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? [~Yes ~No - c witl upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation~ ~Yes ~No 5 wile any ma~ure forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this proiect~ OYes 6. I[ single phase ~rolect: Anticipated period of construction 12 7. If muRi-phased: a. Total number of phases anticipated (number) b. Anticipated date of commencement phase c. Approximate completion date of final phase',__ d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent On subsequent phases? g. Will blasting occur during construction? OYes ENo 9. Number of iobs generated: during construction 15 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project _ 0 11 \Viii project require relocation of.any proiects or facilities? months, (including demolition). month __~-- - . month [~]Yes ]CJNo ton~/cub,c yards -- year. (including demolition). year. after project ,s complete 3 EYes ]~No If yes. explain 12. Is surfacb liquid waste disposal involved? ~Yes a. If yes, indicate type of.waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged 13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? ~Yes ~]No Type 14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? E.~plain Septic and ~e~chinq rinc~ ~Yes ~]No 1¸5, Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood pt~in? OYes '~iNo Will the project generate solid waste? [~es ElNa paper and other recyclabies a. If yes, what is the amount per month 2 tons b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? ]~3Yes ~No Town Sanita~ Landfill c. If yes. give name ; Iocatibn d. Will any wastes no/ go into a.sewage disposal system or.into a sanitary landfill? oYes ][]No e..If Yes. explain 17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid Waste? ~Yes ~]No a. If yes, ;,vhat is the anticipated rate of disposal? tons/mo,th. b. If yes, what is the anticipated site life? years. 18. Will project use herbi(~ides or pesticides?" O)'es 19. Will project routinely prdduee odors (more than one hour per day)? ~Yes 20.: V~till project produce operating noise nxceedim: the local a,nbient noise levels? E3Yes 21. Will project result in an increase in energy (,-.e? ~]Yes If yes , indicate type(s) (insiggificant increase in .power ~n~t gas) 22. If water supply is from w,:lls, Mdicatt: l)un'q)mK cap...:ity . 12 23. Total anticipated water tlsagu per day 6-80 - gallo.~/day, · 24. Does prolect ihvolve Local, State or Federal lundint:? ~]Yes If Yes. explain g,lilons/m,,,u[e. 4 City, Town. V,Ilage Board City, Town. Village Plann,ng Board City, To~vn Zoning Board City, County Health C)epartment Other Local Agencies Other Regional Agencies State Agencies Federal Agencies ]CJYes ~No X~¥es ©No OYes []gNo ]CJYes ONo ~Yes ~No ~Yes ~No ~Yes ~No ~Yes ~No C. Zoning and Planning Information pC Site Plan; Bldg Permit · Site Plan N.A. Health Permit, Architectural Review Town Trustees, NYSDOT, NYSDEC _Bureau ATF 5uom,ltal Dale fall/2000 ~o fall/2000 Public Officials 2000 fall/2000 fall/2001 1. Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? ~C]Yes ©No If Yes. indicate decision required: Ozoning amendment E]zoning variance E]special use permit (~subdivision (~.site plan ~newlrevision Bi: master plan [~]resource management plan [~other 2. What is the zoning classification(sip( the site? 13 and R-80 3 What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning? 9 commercial uses plus vineyard 4. What is the proposed zomng Bt the si.re? B and R-80 (no change) 5 What is the maximum potential development Bi the site it developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? C 6 Is the proposed action cons,stent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? ~Yes []3NO 7 What are the predominant, land use(si and zonio~l:lassific~tio0s within a 'A miJe radius of.gropose:d a'~.t'on~. "B" - General Buslness;"LB" - Lzi~ltea business; "R-80 -Low oensl~y Resla. 8 Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a 'A mile? ~Yes ~.~No 9 If the proposed action ~s the subdivision of land. how many [ors are proposed? NBA. a. What is the .minimum lot size proposed? 10. Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for t e formation of 'S~ver or water districts? []]Yes J~No 11. Will the proposed action create a demand for any Community provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protection)? ]~]Yes E]No .. a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projt~cted demand? ~Yes ~]No 12. Will the proposed .action result in the generation of traffic significant!y above present levels? ~]Yes ~]No a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional tra((ic? I~Yes I-INo D. Informational Details Attach ¢~ny additional information as may l)c neede( to clarify your project· If there are or may be an.,. adverse impacts associated with yotlr proposal, please discuss such impacts and [l~c measures which yot~ propose to mitigate or avoid tf~em. C E. Verification I certify that the information provided above is truc to the best o( my knowledge. Applica,,t/Spo},~.~Name ~ob~e~ Lund- RLA Architects ~ August 4, 2000 the acriD, is in the ~ Area, and yD, are a slnle a4encf, p e e the Coaslal Assessment Form helore proceeding wilh Ibis assessmenl. 5 'General In~ormadon (Re3 y) · In compledn8 the form the reviewer should be guid(:d by the question: Have my responses and determinations bee -. Idendfyin8 that an impact will be potentially lar§e (column 2) does no( mean th,ac it ~s also necessad~ s~gnificant. Any large impact mus~ be evaluated m PART ~ ~o de(ermine s[~m~icance Iden[~ym~ an ~mpac( in column 2 simp~ asks ~ha~ i~ be looked at ~ur~her. · The Examples provided are to assist ~he rev[ewer by showln~ types o~ impacts and wherever possible ~he ~hreshold c magnitude t~at would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughou~ ~he S~ate a~ for most situations. 8ut. for any specific project or site o~her examples and/or lower ~hresholds may be appropri~'t, ~or a Potential Large Impact response, thus ~equirin~ evaluabon in Part 3 · The impacts of each project, on each site. in each locality, will vary Therefore. Lhe examples are illustrative an. · The number o~ examples per question does not indicate the importance o~ each question · In identi~yin~ impacts, consider long ~erm, shor~ term and cumladve e~fects. Inslrudions (Read carefully) a. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any impact b Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers c. If answerin~ Yes to a quesdon then check ~he appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate ~he potential size of impact. If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If impact will occur but threshol( is lower than example, check column 1, d I~ reviewer has doubt about size of the impact ~hen consider the impact as potentially large and proceed to PART 3 e I~ a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated bY chan~e(s) in the project to a small to moderat~ indicates that such a reduction is not possible. Thi~ impact, also check the Yes box in column 3 A No response must be explained in Part 3 IMPACT ON LAND 1. Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site:~. ON© [xamples that would apply to column 2 · Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100 foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed 10%. '~ Construction on land where the depth to the water table is less than 3 feet. * Construction Of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles'. · Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally 3 feet of existing ground surface. · Cbnstruction that will c~ndnue for more (han I year or involve: more than one phase or stage. · Construction or expansion of a sanitary hmdfill the site? (i.e.. cliffs~ dunes. Reological formatio.s, etc.)g]NO LgYES '° Specific land forms: 6 I 2 3 Small to Potential Can impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By impact Impac~ Rrojec! Change :C] O r~es E]No ~ O OYes ONo ~ 0 ~Yes ~No ~ g ~Yes ~No ~ g ~Yes ~No ~ ~ CYes gNo ~ g ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ g ~Yes gNo C IMPAC WATER 3. Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protected? (Under Articles 15, 24. 25 of the Environmental Conservation Law, ECL) OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 · 0evelopable area of site contains a protected water body. · Oredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel oF a protected stream: · Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body · Construction m a designated freshwater or tidal wedand · Other impacts: 4 Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water~ ~NO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 · A 10% increase or decrease in the'surface area of any body of water dr more than a 10 acre increase or decrease. · Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area. · Other impacts: 5. will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? ](ONO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action will ~-equire a discharge permit · Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does hot have approval to serve proposed (proiect) action. · Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45 gallons per minute pumping capacity. · Constr, uction or operation causing any contamination of a water supply system. · Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater. · Liquid effluent will be conveyed off the site to facilities which presently do not exist or have inadequate capacity. · P(oposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per day. · Proposed Action will likely cause siltation or od~er discharge'into an existing body of water to the extent that there will be an obvious visual contrast to natural conditions. · Proposed Action will require the stora~:e of petroleum or chemical products greater than 1,100 gallons. ° Proposed Action will allow resi(hmtial uses in' ;~re3s without wnter and/or sewer services. · Prbp0sed Action locates commercial and/or industrial uses which may faolities. · Otl~er impacts' Will proposed action direr drainage flow or patterns, or ~urface water runoff? ~E]NO OYES 'Exa~nple.s that would al)ply to column 2 Proposed Action would change flood water flows. ~ 7 3 II to Potential Can Impast Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact impact Project Change [] [] ~,?-~ Yes ~ ~ [=]Yes ~]No [] [~ ~Yes E]No ~ ~ ~Yes ~o ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~o ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes 0 0 OY~ 0 0 OYes ONo · ?~oposed Action may cause substantial erosion. · Proposed Action ~s incompatible with existing drainage pa~terns · Proposed Action will allow development in a designated lloodwav · Other impacts: IMPACT ON AIR 7 Will proposed action affect air quality~ ~-NO F~YES Ezamples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips m any given hour. · Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of refuse per hour. · Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed S lbs. per hour or a heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. ° Proposed action wii[ allow an increase in the amount of land committed to industrial use. · Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial development within existing industrial areas · Other impacts: IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 8 Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or end~mgered species? [~NO (~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal list, using the site. over or near site or found on the site · Removal of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat. · Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other than for agricultural purposes. · Other impacts:_ 9. Will Proposed Action substantia, lly affect non-threatened or non-endangered species? 'J~NO r~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or migrakory fish, shellfish or wildlife species. ° Proposed Action requires the remov~tl o1' more Ihan l(t acres of mature forest (over ~00 years of age) or other Ioc;dly mq~ortan~ vegetation, IMPACT ON AGRICULTU,qAL LAND RESOUI~CES 10 Will the Proposed Action affect agricullural hind re~ources~ I-]NO L~Y[S Ex.~mples Ihat would apply to column 2 land (includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vimryard, orchard, etc,) 8 1 2 Large Impact Impact [] E3 3 Can impact Be Mitigated By Project Change []]]Yes i~No [~3Yes ~]No E~Yes E]No E~Yes ~No E)Yes [-INo [~]Yes [~No [::)Yes · Construction activity would excavate or compact the soil proiHe of agricultural land. · The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres of agricultural land or. if located in an Agricultutal District. more than 2.5 acres of agricultural land · The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of a~;riculturgl land management systems (e.g,, subsurface drain lines, outlet ditches. strip cropping); or create a need for such measures (e g. cause a farm field to drain poorly due to increased runoff) · Other impacts: IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11 Will proposed act~ion affect aesthetic resources? )~]NO EYES (If necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 61721. Appendix B.) Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed land uses, or project components obviously different from or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use patterns, whether man-made or natural · Proposed land uses, or project components visible to users of aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce their enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource. · Project components that will result in the elimination or significant screening of scenic views known to be important to the area. · Other impacts: IN1PACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 12. Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic, pre- historic or paleontological importance? ~E]NO []]YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action .occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any facility or site listed on the State or National Register of historic places. · A:n¥ impact to an'archaeological site or fossd bed located within the project site. · Proposed Action ~,~ill occur in an area designated as sensitive for archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inwrr;tory · Other impacts: C IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 13 Will Proposed Action affect the quant.ty or quality ct exi.,lmg or Examples that would apply to column 2 ]t~NO O.Y.[S Other impacts; ~ 9 sl~ 2 3 II to- Potential Can Impact 8e Moderate Large Mitigated By tmpact Impact iPr°ject Change ~]]]] [~ ~Yes E]No ~]] 0 OYes ONo O 0 ' OYes ONo 0 ~ ~Ye~. ~No ~ ~ ~ves ~No ~ ~ ~Y~s ~No ~ ~ ~es ~No 0 0 OYes O O OYes ONo O O OY*s ONo 0 0 OYes eNO ](]YES Examples that would apply to column 2 Aherauon of present patterns of movement oi peop!e and/or goods Proposed Ac~ian will result in ma~o~ ~ra~fic ~oblems O~her impacts: MPACT ON ENERGY 15 Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply~* ]~NO '~. Y E S Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action wit] cause a greater than 5% increase in the use pt any form of energy in the municipality. · Proposed Action will require the creation qr extension of an energy transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two randy residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use. . Other impacts: NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS 16 Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibrauon as a result oi the Proposed Acdon~ ' ]k~NO ~:YES Ex;rnples that would apply to column 2 · 13lasting within 1,500 teet of a hospital school or other sensmve facility · Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day) · Proposed Action will produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels tot noise outside of structures · Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would ac: as a noise screen, · Other impacts:_ IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH 17. Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety.! ](~]NO [~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances (i.e. oil. pesticides, chemicals, radiati¢)n, etc.) in the event of accident or upset conditions, or there may be a chronic Iow level discharge or emission. · Proposed Action may result 'in the burial <>f "hazardous ~vastes" in any fo~m (i.e. toxic, poisonous, hiRhlY reactive, rndioaclive, irrita(inl:. in[ecdous, etc.) ' SIorage facilities tot one million or mot(: gallons of liquified na(ural gas o~ olhcr flammable liquids 1 2 3 ~mail lo Potential Can Impact Be Moderale Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Changt [~ ~ (~Yes ~]No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No m ~ ~ ~Yes ~ ~ ~Yes ~ ~ ~Yes IMPACT ON GROW AND CHARACTER OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD 18 Will proposed action n[fect the character o[ (heex~stmg commumty? Examples that would apply to column 2 ~YES ° The permanent population of the city, town or v,llage in which tile proiect is Ioca(ed is likely to grow by more (hah S% · The municipal budget lot capital expenditures or operating serwces will increase by more than S% per year as a result el this proiec[ · Proposed action will conflict With o[ficially adopted plans or goals · Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use · Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures or areas el historic importance to the commumty. · Development will create a demand for additional community services (e.g. schools, police and fire. etc.) · Proposed Action will set an important precedent for i:uture project~ · Proposed Action will create or eliminate employment. · Other impacts: SmSa i 2 3 II Io Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mi!igated By Impact Impac~ Project Change [] [] []Yes ©No [] ~ C]Yes []NO [] [] []Yes ~]No [] [] []Yes []No 0 ~ []Yes ~No ~ ~ Wes ~o ~ ~ ~Yes ~o ~ ~ ~Yes ~o ~ ~ ~Ves ~o 19 Is there, or is there likely to be. public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? ~]NO ~YES If Any Action in Part 2 Is Identified as a Potential Large Impact or If You Cannot Determine the Magnitude of Impact, Proceed to Part 3 C Part 3--EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS Responsibilily of Lead Agency . Part 3 must be prepared if one or more impact(s) is considered to be pol;~dtl-ally large, even i,[ the impact(s) m~y be miligated. Instructions Discuss the following for each impact identified in Column 2 of ,Part 2: 1. Briefly describe the impact. 2. Describe (if applicable) l~ow the impact could be mitigated or reduced to a small to modc, rate impact by protect change(s). 3. Based on the information available, decide if it is reasonable to conclude that this impact is imp¢~rlant. To answer the question of importance, consider: · The probability of the impact occurrm~ · The duration of the impact 11 C Ap~c~i~ S Environmental Qualit~eview Visua! EAF Addendum This form may be used to provide additional information relating to Question ti of Part 2 of the Full EAF' (To be comp!eted by Lead Agency) Distance Between Visibility 1. Would the project be visible from: A parcel of [and which is dedicated to and available to the public for the use, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or man-made scenic qualities.) · An overlook or parcel of land dedicated to public observation, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or man-made scenic qualities.) · A site or structure listed on the National or State Registers of Historic Places? State Parks.) The State Forest Preserve? · Hational Wildlife Refuges and state game refuges? National I"{atural Landmarks and other outstanding natural features? · P{ational Park Service lands? · Rivers designated as Hational or State Wild. Scenic or Recreational? · Any transpoptation corridor of high exposure, such as part of the interstate System, or Amtrak? · A governmentally established or designated interstate or inter-county foot trail, or one formally proposed for establishment or 'designation? · A site. area. lake. reservoir or highway designated as scenic? · Municipal park, or designated open space? · County road? · State? · Local road? Project and Resource (in Miles) O- ',& V~ - Vz '/2.3 3--5 5 + o [] © O' [] © [] 0 0 0 [] [] 0 [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] Is the visibility of the project ~eason;,l? (i.e.. :;creencd by su,nmer foliage. I)Ut viMble during other [~Yes during which d;e proicct '*,iii be visible.) D~iSCRIPTION OF EXJi~,~ING VISUAL ENVIRONMENT 4. From each item chilled in question I. check those which environment· describe the surrounding Within *V, mile *1 mile Essentially undeveloped [] [] Forested [] [] Agricultural ~ [] Suburban residential [] [] Industrial [] [] Commercial [] [] Urban ~ [] River, Lake, Pond [] [] Cliffs. Overlooks ~--J [] Designated Open Space [] [] Flat ~ ' [] Hilly [] ~ Mountainous E} [] Other [] [] PIOTE: add attachments as needed 5. Are there visually similar projects within: 'V~ mile []Yes []Plo '1 miles ~,Yes []Plo '2 miles []Yes []Plo '3 miles []Yes []plo · Distance from project site are provided for assistance. Substitute oiher distances as appropriate EXPOSURE 6. The annual number of viewers likely to observe the proposed project is NOTE: When user data is unavailable or unknown, use best estimate. COP{TEXT 7. The situation or activity in which the viewers are engaged while viewing the:proposed action is Activity Travel to and from work Involved in recreational activities Routine travel by residents At a residence At worksite Other FREGUENCY Holidays/ Daily Weekly Weekends Seasonally [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] Date: 09/28/00 Transaction(s): Town Of Southold P.O Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 * * * RECEIPT * * * Recelpt~: 47834 Subtotal 1 Seqra Review $500.00 Check#: 47834 Total Paid: $500.00 ~Tmm Name: Clerk ID: Peconic, Bay Winery P O Box 818 Cutchogue, NY 11935 JOYCEW In.mai ID: 18432 Town Of Southold P.O Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 * * * RECEIPT * * * Date: 09/22/00 Transaction(s): 1 Application Fees Cash#: 2731 Recelpt~: 2731 Subtotal Total Paid: $406.48 Name: Clerk ID: Robert, Lund Associates Architects Ltd 30 Redwood Rd Sag Harbor, NY 11963 LINDAC SEP 2 2 2~ Soutflold Town Planning Board Internal ID: 18203 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES 4829 EAST LAKE HARRIET PARKWAY, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 P.O. BOX 1134, WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 ARCHITECTS, (612) 927-0680 (516) 537-5500 LTD. '-~' FAX (612) 927-0382 FAX (516) 725-4478 TRANSMITTAL TO: DATE: FROM: PROJECT NUMBER: Mr. Robert Kassner Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 631-765-1938 ext. 5 June 7, 2001 Robert Lurid 9916 Peconic Bay Winery JUN 0 8 2601 Southold Town Planning Board Enclosed please find 5 copies & 1 original of the Health Department Approval for the new Peconic Bay Winery Tasting Barn. Please call with any questions. Robert Lund Pec01_06_07trKas.doc AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING This is to serve notice that I personally posted the property known as by placing the Town's official poster notices(s) within 10 feet of t~e front property line facin~ t~e street(s) w~ere it can be easily seen, an~ t~at I ~ave c~ec~e~ to be sure t~e poster ~as re~aine~ in Dlace for seven ~ays prior to t~e ~ate of t~e public hearingon I ~C~,~ / , I have sent notices, by certified mail, the receipts of which are attached, to the owners of record of every prope~y which abuts and evew property which is across from any puDlic or private strget from the.above mentioned prope~y Ad dress Date PLEASE RETURN TIllS AFFIDA VIT AND CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS ON THE Dtl Y OF. OR AT TIlE PUBLIC REARING Re: Lavcor Agricultural. Inc./Peconic Bay Winery SCTM#: 1000-103-1-19.2 & 19.11 Date of Hearing: March 12, 2001, 6:15 p.m. So thold Town Planning Board Endorsement Required) , I.rl Return ReCeil~.Fes (Endorsement Required) ~ Restricted Delivery Fee Gee, Russell W. & Ma~ Kat~n B~er ............. Viney~d View Drive .............. ~- M~ E. Tren~l~ge Cutchogue, NY 11~35 ~ ~ Stillwater Avenue ~d Willow S~cet ~ ~ F ~utchogue, NY 11936 Emily Kosclusko ................... Sfillwater Avenue Box 281 .................... ~ Marion R. King Cutchogue, NY 11935 ~ 51155MacRoad .................. [~ 90 Bridle l~e .............. ~ ~' jmes&ElimbethHom~~ ....... ,I ,00~eodorc New P' Behr.......... I P Suffolk Road 1 I ] Fr~k T. Klos ~---- ........... ~ .o. ~o~ ~:~ ................ ~ I ~ ~ ~utchogue, NY 11935 ........... [ ~ [New Suffolk, NY 11956 ~ ~ Stillwater Avenue Na~an L Serota ~ . ~l ~.o. ~ox6~ .................. Reynold Blum ~ ........... ~ = Main Road ~ ichael & Eli~bCth Ladem P.O. Box 709 ............. ~ ~ ~ 1625 Stillwater Awnue I~ Cutch°gue'NY 11935 ~m ' t.,,..~.ta F.. [ $ ~.~ ~ ' ~ k Cutch°gue'NY 11935 l. - ' ' }~i Steven & Debor~ Wick ~ ............. Kelly Jean Kaelin .................. t~ P.O. Box 985 g 425 Stillwater Avenue ]--t' = [-~5 Cutchogue, NY , 1935.......... ' l ................ ~ . Cutchogue, NY 11935 [ Steven Cielatka & Karen H~s ................... ~ ~Y. Telephone Co. c/o ~EX / .................. / 895 Stillwater Ave~e ~ Prope~ W~ Department 3 l't Floor [ Cutchogue, NY 11}35 .................. = I095 Avenue of me Americas ~ ~ New York, NY 10036 SENDER: Russell W.& Mary Kathryn Baker Vineyard view Drive Cutchogue, NY 11935 Theodore P. Behr 6500 New Suffolk Road P.O. Box 6'29 New Suffolk, NY 11956 I also wtah to receive Ihe followtng sen~ea (fo~ an extra fee): 1. r-1 Addressee'a Address 2. [] Res'atcted Dellvely Co~ postmaster for fee. 4a. Afllcle Number 46. Service Type ' - [] Express IVlall [] Irmumd 0 Re~umRec~Me~handlm [] COD 8. Addres~e'~ h,ld.~.. 5. Recelved By:. (Print Name) --~ PSFom r, pS~Fom~ 3811, Dl~erreer 1994 10~ James & Elizabeth Homan Main Road /~~ 1193.5 f ./ PS ~ 3~11, December"le94 Steven Cielatka & Karen Haas 895 Stillwater Avenue Cutchogue, NY 11935 PS Form 3811, December 1994 Edward & Sharon Machnowski 7.55 Stillwater Avenue ... I~ Cutchogue, NY 11935 Dorothy Jeanette Chamews & Everett B. Glover 1145 Stillwater Avenue Cutchogue, NY 11935 Michael & Elizabeth Lademau 1625 Stillwater Avenue Cutchogue, NY 11935 : (Print Name) Marion R. King , ,: , 51155 Main ROad Cutchogue, NY 11935 5. Rg?elved By: (Print Name) 6. Signature: (Addressee or Agent) 3. Article A~,~ to: iN.Y. Telephone Co. c/o NYNEX Properly Tax Department 31st Floor 1095 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036 El Re~stered ~ Cert~ed [] Express Mall [] Insured [] Retum Recetp~ f~r Memhandlm [] COD 'On/y ff requ==;~J 5. Received By'. (Print Name) 1 102595-97-BX)179 4a. Afltcle N~mber 4b. SenRce Type [] Registered ]~Cedlfied · [] Express M~ [] Insured [] RetumReceiptforMemhandlse [] COD :: Dat:f D::lsv~7?d~f/y/f requested a~d fee/s_.pa~) 102595-97-B~0179 Domestic Return Receipt 4a. Artlde N~ar ' 4b. ~ D ~ ~1 D In~ ~R~m~~ ~ ~D 7. Date of Deliveq( -- 8. Add~see s Addreas (On/y ff requested ·nd ee ~p~d) Receipt · Write'Retom Rece/pf Req~e~ed' on the m~plece below 1he artic~ number. I also wish to receive the following ee~tces (for an extra fee): 1. [] Addressso'$ Address 2. [] Restricted Delivery Consult poslmeeter for fee. 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. ArUcle Number Emily Kosclusko ype Stillwater Avenue [] Registered Box 281 C utchogue, NY I 1935 I alsO wish to receive the ~ .oomp(~e ~ 3, 4~ and 4b. following ee~ces (for an 5. F[e~alved By: (Print Name) ~ to you. 1. r"l Addreseee'$ Addre~ 6.$ig~:(Addi~.~ent) ~ .The Return Receipt will N~v to whom the reticle wa~ ~Jvmred and the date Consult peetmeeter for fee. ; PS F°ml 3811~L December 1994 ..... 4b. Sen&e Ecynold Blum [] Registered )21~Ceeitled Edward & Sharon Machnowski Main Road r-I Express Mall [] Insured 755 Sti]iwater Avenue P:O. Box 709 [] Ralum Remipt for Mmdmndlse [] COD Cutchogue, NY 11935 CDtcl~-6~u~.,N¥ 11935 7. Date of Dlellven/ 5. RsogNe~By: (Print Name) // 5. Received By: (Print Name) L Add,,,=,~'s Z.~di~ (Only ff requ~,d 6. ~,lgnatere: (Addressee or A~an0 - "*" v 1/ o ~' X i F~ank T. Klos James & Georgeanna Fogarty ~ Stillwater Avenue 32320 Route 25 ~ Cutchogue, NY 11935 P.O. Box 61 Cutchogue, NY 11935 ~l $ Fteceh/6d By: (P~ntlV~'7 5. Flec~ived By: (Print Nat~). Naltmn ~L. Serota ~ Everett B. Glover PS Form 381 '1~ Dece~er 1994 orm 811, D,..~,,,;,,,~ 1994 [] Reg~md ~ Certmed [] Express Mail I"1 Insured [] RetumRec~10rMmrchandlse [] COD 7. Date of ~ellve~/ 8. Addres~e's Addre~ (On/y/f requested and fee ~ pa/d) ~025~I~7-B~79 Domestic Return Receilo( 4b. San4~e Type [] Registered ~ Cemllffed ~ Express Mall [] insured [] Retum Receipt ~ Merchandise [] COD 7. Date of Deli~any 03 Ioz[.oF 8. Addreseee's Addres~ (Onlylif requested and fee /s pa/d) ~02595-97-B-0179 Domestic Retum Receipt G~g~.;-, 2. & E:/~b,4h A. J,;,.s ward & Sharon Machnowski 90 Bridle lane 755 Stlllwatcr Avenue Cutchogue. NY 11935 CtlR:hogue, NY 11935 t/ '~95 Stillwater Avenue Cutehogue, NY 11935 \ fink T. Klus ~ ~t,i,l, lwate, Avenue ,Cutchogue, NY 11935 ,orothy Charnewa & Jc~c~e ]~vefetl B, Glover 1145 Stillwater Avenue C'ut~hogu¢, NY 11935 Bmily Kosclusko tillwatar Avenue ox 281 Cutchoguc, NY 1193S · ~Mary E. Trentalange ../ Stillwater Avenue and Willow Cutchogue~ NY 11936 / 6i~hael & Elizabeth Ludcman 5 StJllwatcr Avenue Cutchoguc, NY 11935 Bn & Deborah Wick ox 985 Cutchoguc, NY 11935 .James & Georgeanna l:ogarty ')(/32320 Route 25 '-/\ P.O. Box 61 CutchoSue, NY 11935 '~ari°n R. King ~/ 51155 Main Road Cutchogue, NY 11935 / ~hmes & Elizabeth ~/ ~Main Road Cutchogue, NY 11935 ~.usael[ W, & Mary Kathcya Baker "/ \Vineyazd View Drive Cutahoguc, NY 11935 ~. Telephone Co, c/o NYNEX Property Ta.x Department 31 w Floor 1095 Awnu¢ ofth~ Am~icas Now York, NY 10036 Cutchoguc, Ny 11935 V~ Reynold Blum Main Koad P,O, Box 709 Cut~hosue, NY 11935 ,.../7~E0 ET0 E&an L. Scrota ant Sunrise Highway Valley Strclun, NY I 1581 / ~ ~odore P. Behr /~'6500 New Suffolk l(.oad L,/ ~..o. cox 629 blaw Suftbik~ NY 11956 MAR 13 2.001 Site Plan Applications Public Hearings Under the current site plan application procedure, the process for reviewing a site plan application is: a public hearing is not scheduled and held by the Planning Board until after, among other things, the site plan has received a stamped Health Department approval. The applicant shall now have the following options: I. To follow the established procedure, or To have the Planning Board schedule and hold a public hearing on the site plan application and have the Planning Board vote on the proposed conditional site plan prior to the applicant receiving Health Departm, ent approval subject to the following conditions: The applicant hereby agrees and understands that if the site plan which receives stamped Health Department approval differs in any way from the proposed conditional site plan on which the Planning Board held a public hearing and voted on, then the Planning Board has the right and option, if the change is material to any of the issues properly before the Planning Board, to hold a public hearing on this "revised" site plan application and review its conditional approval. Bo The applicant agrees not to object to a new public hearing and Planning Board review of the revised application. Applicant Agreement on Site Plans The applicant is aware of the terms of this approval and certifies to these terms by his/her signature below. / Date BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD State Environmental Quality Review NEGATIVE DECLARATION Notice of Determination Non-Significant March 12, 2001 This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental Law. The Southold Town Planning Board, as lead agency, has determined that the proposed action described below will not have a significant effect on the environment and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared. Name of Action: SCTM#: Location: SEQR Statue: Proposed site plan for Peconic Bay Winery 1000-103-1-19,2 & 19.11 Route 25, Cutchogue Type I ( ) Unlisted (X) Conditioned Negative Declaration: Yes ( ) No (X) Description of Action: This proposed site plan is for the construction of an 10,515 square foot winery building. SECIR Ne,qative Declaration - Pa,qe Two Reasons Supporting This Determination: This project involves the construction of an 10,515 square foot winery building. A winery is a permitted use in this General Business (B) Zone, thus the proposed action is consistent with zoning. An Environmental Assessment Form has been submitted and reviewed, and it was determined that no significant adverse effects to the environment were likely to occur should the project be implemented as planned. There has not been any correspondence received from the Department of Health Service in the allotted time. Therefore, it is assumed that there are no comments or objections from that agency. There has not been any correspondence received from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation in the allotted time. Therefore, it is assumed that there are no comments or objections from that agency. The applicant will have to comply with the requirements of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code (SCSC) and all relevant standards of water supply and sewage disposal systems. Design and flow specification, subsurface soil conditions and site plan details will have to be approved by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS). This impact is not considered significant due to the anticipated project compliance with established requirements of the SCSC and the SCDHS and the required relevant permits. For Further Information: Contact Person: Robert G. Kassner Address: Planning Board Telephone Number: (631)765-1938 cc: Suffolk County Dept. of Health NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation, Stony Brook NYS Dept. of Transportation Elizabeth Neville, Town Clerk Southold Town Building Dept. Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Applicant MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: Bennett Orlowski, Chairman Building Department March 8, 2001 BUILDING DEPARTMENT SITE PLAN CERTIFICATION Project Peconic BayWinery Location Main Road Cutchoque SCTM# 1000 - Section 103 - Block 1 - Lot 9.11 & 9.2 Date of Last Revision 1/31/2001 1. THE PROPOSED USE winery AND ACCESSORY USE AS INDICATED ON THE PLAN IS / ARE PERMITTED IN THIS B DISTRICT PROPOSED AND EXISTING BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES COMPLY WITH PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 100 OF SOUTHOLD TOWN CODE. 2. ALL STRUCTURES COMPLY WITH SETBACKS AS CONTAINED IN BULK SCHEDULES OR ELSEWHERE iN CHAPTER 100. Authorized '~ature environmental consultant, ceiling heights could be further reduced to 8 feet or semi-cathedral ceilings could be used on the second floors with an 8 foot plate. ROOF VENTS - To be of a color to match the roof and placed on the north side to the extent possible. SCREEN PLANTINGS - To be used to minimize the visual impact of the air conditioning compressors and the gas heat side wall vents. SLIDING TERRACE DOORS - Grills to be used on those facing south but not to the north. UTILITIES - Although not discussed, the Committee assumes that these will be buried and that rooms in the basements will be used to house the meters. LATER - Signage submission as well as catalogue cuts and location of the exterior lighting. Based on the above, it was MOVED by Garrett Strang and seconded by Howard Meinke to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the project. Vote of the Committee: Ayes All. (Main Road- Cutchogue) The Committee reviewed the conditions stipulated in its meeting of August 29, 2000. The location of roof penetrations, screening of air conditioning compressors, burying of utilities, external lighting fixtures and colors of siding and signage were all satisfactory. Moved by Robert Keith and seconded by Yah Rieger, it was RESOLVED to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the project. Robert W. Keith Secretary SOUTHOLD TOWN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE February 27, 2001 The ARC met at Town Hall at 4:00 p.m.. Members present were: Garrett A. Strang, Co-Chairman Robert I. Brown, Co-Chairman Theodore Carpluk, Southold Herbert Ernst, Southold Howard G. Meinke, Cutchogue Yan Rieger, Odent Sanford Hanauer, Matituck Robert Keith, Mattituck, Secretary NAR - '/ 2001 Southold Town Planning Board Also attending were Robert G. Kassner of the Planning Board Staff as well as Patdcia C. Moore, Attorney, and Douglas Hen'lin, Architect, for Breezy Sound Motel. Moved by Garrett A. Strang and seconded by Howard Meinke it was RESOLVED to APPROVE the MINUTES of the meeting of February 1, 2001. Vote of the Committee: Ayes All. BREEZY SOUND MOTEL (North Road - Greenport) Discussion with Mrs. Moore and Mr. Herrlin about the open items from the pre-submission meeting of February 1 brought the following conclusions: PARKING - Inasmuch as the location of the parking places cannot be moved, the natural landscaping will be enhanced to fully buffer the visual impact from the read. SIDING - To be Hardy Plank rather than vinyl. COLORS - Fascia, trim, railings and exterior doors(6 panel) to be white. All buildings, including the office, to be driftwood gray with rustic Virginia slate roof color. CASINGS - Those surrounding both doors and windows to be 3 inches wide. ROOF PITCH - To be 6 in 12. If the reduction in ceiling height from 10 to 9 feet is not sufficient to meet the recommendation of building height by the PLANNING BOARD MEMB~ BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIA~O Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD February 26, 2001 Robert Lund, RLA Architects Cio Graystone P.O. Box 1768 2282 Montauk Highway Bridgehampton, NY 11932 Re: Peconic Bay Winery SCTM#1000-103-1-19.11 & 19.2 Dear Mr. Lund: The final public hearing on the maps, dated August 4, 2000, will be held on Monday, March 12, 2001 at 6:15 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall. Please refer to the enclosed copy of Chapter 58, Notice of Public Hearing, in regard to the Town's'notification procedure. The notification form is enclosed for your use. The sign and the post will need to be picked up at the Planning Office, Southold Town Hall. Please retum the endorsed Affidavit of Posting and the signed green return receipts from the certified mailings on the day of, or at the public hearing. The sign and the post will need to be returned at your earliest convenience after the public hearing. Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding the above. Very truly yours, wski, Jr. / Chairman encls. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING This is to serve notice that I personally posted the property known as by placing the Town's official poster notices(s) within 10 feet of the front property line facing the street(s) where it can be easily seen, and that I have checked to be sure the poster has remained in place for seven days prior to the date of the public hearing on I have sent notices, by certified mail, the receipts of which are attached, to the owners of record of every property which abuts and every property which is across from any public or private street from the above mentioned property on Your name (print) Signature Address Date Notary Public PLEASE RETURN THIS AFFIDA V1T AND CERTIFIED MAlL RECEIPTS ON THE DAY OF. OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING Re: Lavcor Agricultural. Inc./Peconic Bay Winery SCTM#:1000-103-1-19.2 & 19.11 Oateof HeariNg: March 12, 2001, 6:15 p.m. C Southold Town Plannin,q Board Notice to Adjacent Property Owners You are hereby given notice: 1. That the undersigned has applied to the Planning Board of the Town of Southold for a site plan; 2. That the property which is the subject of the application is located adjacent to your property and is described as follows: SCTM#1000-103-1-19.2 & 19.11; 3. That the property which is the subject of this application is located in the B (General Business) and R-80 (Low Density Residential) Zoning Districts. 4. That the application is for a 10,515 sq. ft. winery building on a 27.031 acre parcel. The property is located on State Route 25 (Main Road) in Cutchogue; 5. That the files pertaining to this application are open for your information during normal business days between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. Or, if you have any questions, you can call the Planning Board Office at (631)765- 1938. That a public hearing will be held on the matter by the Planning Board on Monday, March 12, 2001 at 6:15 p.m. in the Meetin,q Hall at Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southotd; that a notice of such hearing will be published at least five days prior to the date of such hearing in the Suffolk Times, published in the Town of Southold; that you or your representative have the right to appear and be heard at such hearing. Petitioner/Owner's Name(s): Lavcor Agricultural, Inc./Peconic Bay Winery Date: 2/26/01 NELSON, POPE & VOORHIB, LLC CHARLES J. VOORHLS, CEE AICP · ARTHUR J. KOERBER, RE. · VINCENT G. DONNELL'~ RE. VICTOR BERT, RE. · JOSEPH R, EPIFANIA, RE,, ROBERT G.NELSON, JR, RE, PAUL M. RACZ, RLS Robert G. Kassner Town of Southold Town Hall Planning Board Office PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Rc: February21,2001 FEB 20 1 Southoid Town Planning Board Pecoafic Bay Winery Main Road, Cutchogue SCTM #1000-103-01-19.11 & 19.2 Dear Mr. Kassner, As requested, the vehicular trip generation estimates contained in Robert Lund's letter of 02/20/01 to your attention have been reviewed. We concur with the applicant's methodology and conclusions. Understanding the dearth of empirical data available, the estimates of traffic expected to be generated at the expanded Peconic Bay Winery site are reasonable and prudent. The volume of traffic to be generated does not warrant further traffic impact analysis. We recommend that the applicant satisfy the requirements of the New York State Department of Transportation. Please feel free to call should you have any questions or require any additional information. Sincerely, NELSON, POPE & VOORHIS, LLC Shana M. Lacey cc: Chic Voorhis, NP&V Peter Brown, N&P Subntission Without a Cover Letter Date: SouthotdTown Com, menls: PLANNING BOARD MEMBER~ BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD February 9, 2001 Garrett A. Strang, Architect 1230 Travler Street, Box 1412 Southold, NY 11971 Peconic Bay Winery Main Road, Cutchogue SCTM# 1000-103-1-19.11 & 19.2 Dear Mr. Strang, The Planning Board has received a letter fi.om Robert Lund concerning the above project. Mr. Lund replies to the Committees conditions of preliminary approval. Please schedule a meeting of your committee to review his input. Mr. Lund said he would follow up on item number five, (sample of stain for the siding). I will be on vacation from February 13 to February 23, 2001. Mr. Craig Turner will be handling my work, or if you wish to have a meeting the week of February 26, 2001, I will be able to attend. Please feel free to call Mr. Lund at 612 927-0382 in Minneapolis, for any questions you may have. x--/Robert O. Kassner Site Plan Reviewer Cc: Robert Lund, Associates Architects, Ltd. § 58-1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING § 58-1 Chapter 58 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING §58-1. Providln g notice of public hearings. [HISTORY: Adopted by the Town Board of the Town of Southold 12-27-1995 as L.L. No. 25-1995. Amendments noted where applicable.] § 58-1. Provi~llng notice of public hearings. Whenever the Code calls for a pubhc hearing, this section shall apply. Upon determining that an application is complete, the board or commission reviewing the same shall fix a time and place for a public hearing thereon. The board or commission reviewing an application shall provide for the giving of notice: A. By causing a notice giving the time, date, place and nature of the hearing to be published in the official newspaper within the period prescribed by law. B. By requiring the applicant to erect the sign provided by the town, which shall be prominently displayed on the premises facing each public or private street which the property involved in the application abuts, giving notice of the application, the nature of the approval sought thereby and the time and place of the public hearing thereon. The sign shall be set back not more than ton (10) feet from the property line. The sign shall be displayed for a period of not less than seven (7) days immediately precedlnE the date of the public hearing. The applicant or his/her agent shall file an affidavit that s/he has complied with this provision. C. By requiring the applicant to send notice to the owners of record of every property which abuts and every property which is across from any public or private street 5801 ~-2~-~ § 58-1 SOUTHOLD CODE § 58-1 from the property included in the application. Such notice shall be made by certified mail, return receipt requested, posted at least seven (7) days prior to the date of the initial public hearing on the application and addressed to the owners at the addresses listed for them on the local assessment roll. The applicant or agent shall file an affidavit that s/he has complied with this provision. LAVCOR AGRICULTURAL PECONIC BAY WINERY O 1000-103-1-19.2 & 19.11 SITE PLAN FOR A 10,515 SQ. FT. WINERY BUILDING ON A 27.031 ACRE PARCEL MON. - MARCH 12, 2001 - 6:15 P.M. O C PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD LEGAL NOTICE Notice of Public Hearing NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, pursuant to Article XXV of the Code of the Town of Southold, a public hearing will be held by the Southold Town Planning Board, at the Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York in said Town on the 12th day of March, 2001 on the question of the following: 6:15 P.M. Public Hearing for the proposed site plan for Peconic Bay Winery. The property is located on State Route 25, 400' West of Harbor Lane in Cutchogue, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, State of New York. Suffolk County Tax Map Number 1000-103-1-19.2 & 19.11. Dated: 2/26/01 BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman PLEASE PRINT ONCE ON THURSDAY, MARCH 1, 2001 AND FORWARD ONE (1) AFFIDAVIT TO THIS OFFICE, THANK YOU. COPIES SENT TO: Suffolk Times Traveler Watchman Notice ag Publ~ NOTICE IS HERI~BY GIVEN the Town of Somhold, a public being will ~ held by the Southold Town Planning B~, al ~he Town Hall Main Ro~, Southold, New York in said Town on ~ 12~ day of M~h, 2~1 on the question of ~he following: 6:15 p.m. ~bl~c H~ng for the 25. 4~' West of Harbor Lane in Cutchogue, Town of Somhold, County of Suffolk. Stale of New York. Suffolk County T~ Map Numar Dated: ~1 BY ORDER OF ~ SOU~OLD TO~ PL~G BO~D STATE OF NEW YORK) )SS: ,. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) ,~'.L~--'C~.~ r-~ ~ of Mattituck, in said county, being~ d~ly swom, says that he/she is Principal clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a weekly newspaper, pub- lished at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, and that the Notice of which the annexed is a pdnted copy, has been regularly pub- lished in said for ~ on of CHriSTINA T. WEBER Newspaper once each week weeks successively, commencing the ~ day Swom to before me this day of _~-I,.C~CC..~ 20 C) [ , BENNETT ORLOWSR/, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS ~ KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: FROM: RE: Edward Forrester, Director of Code Enforcement Robert G. Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer~ Peconic Bay Winery Main Road, Cutchogue SCTM9 1000-103-1- 19.2 & 19.11 DATE: February 26, 2001 Please review the attached for certification. 516 425 1257 FAX COVER SHEET Robert Kassner Phone: Fax: From: Date: Re: No. of Pages: (including Cover) 765-1938 765-3136 Shana Lacey February 21, 2001 Peconic Bay Winery 2 Comments: Please call should you have any questions. Submission Without a Cover Letter Subject: Date: Permit Fee: $ 550.~ Insurance Fee: $ 175.~ Total Received: Check or M.D. No.: ,~"/6/5~?? *Permittee: G~,~ON~ ~r'rT,r~"~, TNC. 2228 ~UK ~,~~, ~ 11932 att: Billing Address: [Complete if different from above) STAI~F NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF TRANSP(~AT ON HIGHWAY WORKPERMIT 1~-~-0846 Project Idenhhcahon No.: E~xpiration Date: / / SR No.: 8229 / / Deeosit Recr_~or $ Oheck or M.O. No.: Dated; Estimated C~t of Work Pe~o~ed in the Btate Right,of,Way $ or Underling on File: (8 [5~.~) Return of Deposit Made Payable to: (Complete if different from Permiffee) Under the provisions of the Highway Law or Vehicle & Traffic Law, permission is hereby granted to the permittee to: TO OPEN THE SOUTH SIDE OF NYS HOUTE 25, EAST OF EUGENE HOAD, NGTTITUCH. TO INSTALL T#O NE# CUHB CO~S, CONCRETE CUIIO AND SIDEI~ALK FOR THE 'PECONIC 8AY laINERY'; ALL i40HN SHALL BE HONE IN ~CCONDDNCE I~ETH NYS SPECS OR ASOBE ETC. NAINT ENANCE AND PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBZLITY OF THE PERNITTEE AT ALL TINES UNTIL CONPLETION OF iLL # ORN ETC. THE PERMITI'EE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC. ANYONE WORKING N THE STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY IS REQUIRED TO WEAR HIGH VISIBILITY APPAREL (ORANGE/YELLOW) AND HARD HAT. C°~JgiiF0l:K $OUTHOLD Municipality5' Route # - as set forth and represented in the attached application at the particular location or area, or over the routes as stated therein, if required; and pursuant to the conditions and regulations general or special, and methods of pedorming work, if apy; all of which are set forth in the application and form of this permit. Dated at: Commissione~ o] Tr~vfspod~d 62115~i VITOF. LENA iMPORTANT ~ '~~ ~iS PERM', ~ ~PUCA~ON AND D~NG (OR CO~ES ~EREO~ A~ACHED SH~L BE P~IN ~E ~NDS OF THE CO~A~O~ B~ORE ~Y WORK BEANS. ~E HIGHWAY WORK PERM~ SHA~ BE AV~BLE AT ~OR~OR~IS ~A~ED ~D UPON ITS ~UPL~ON, ~E PERUI~EE ABSOL~ELY UU~ NO~ ~E RESIDE~ ENGINEER, - 7/7 / . JOHN YOUN611N 19N COUNTY RO F R U~N COMPL~/~I~bRK A~HOR~ED, THE ~[~ ~MPL~ED, SIGNED BY THE p~MI~EE ~D DE~V~RED TO ~E R~IDE~ ENGINEER. Work authorized by this pe~it has been completed. Refund of deposit or retur~release of bond is requested. DATE PERMITrEE AUTHORIZED AGENT (If Any} Work authorized by this permit has been satisfactorily completed and is accepted. Reverse side of this form must be completed. I-I Refund of Deposit is authorized I-t Return of Bond is authorized r-I Amount charged against Bond may be released Ct Retain Bond for future permits · I-t Other DATE RESIDENT ENGINEER The Regional Office will forward this form to the Main Office with the appropriate box checked. Permit closed Bond returned/released Refund of Guarantee Deposit on this permit is authorized Other DATE The issuing authority reserves the right to suspend or revoke this permiti at either before or during the operations authorized. The Permittee will cause an approved copy Of the applicati0nto completed, in accordance with the terms of the attached ~ this permit will be repaired to the satisfaction of the Department of Transportat!or~: ) * Upon completion of the work within the state highway ~ ~; municipality, or state department or a repair of such work or portion cause, satisfactorily pursuant to corporation, and February. 21, 2001 Robert O. Ka.ssn:r Town of Southold Tovm Hall planmng Board PO Box l 179 $outhold, NY 11971-0959 P¢conlc Bay Winery Man Road, Cutchogue $CTM#I000-I03-01-19.11 & 19.2 As requested, the vchicula~ trip generation cstimat~ con~aillcd in Robert Lund's letter of 02/20/01 to your attention have been revi~ved. We concur with the applicant's meihodology tnd conclusions. Understand[rig thc dearth of empirical da~ available, thc cstimat~ of ~raflic expected to be g~era~d.at the expmided Peconic Bay Win~/site are r~.sonable and prudent. The volume of traffic r,c be generated does not warrant furdaer traffic impaol analy~i,s. We r~commend that the applicant satisfy the req~iremgnts of the Ngw York State D~pa~tmgat of Tramportaii~n, Please foci flee to call should you have any qu~dom or require any additional iaformafion. Sinc~rdy, N~/.sOr% PoP~ & Vooams, LLC Shana M. Lacey cc: Chic Voorhis, NP&V Peter Brown, N&P TOTRL P. 02 PLANNING BOARD M~MBE~ BENNETT ORLOWSK/, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD February 9, 2001 Nelson Pope & Voorhis 572 Walt Whitman Road Melville, NY 2188 Peconic Bay Winery Main Road, Cutchogue SCTM# 1000-103-1-19.11 & 19.2 Dear Mr. Voorhis, The Planning Board has received the enclosed letter from Robert Lund regarding the above projeet. In your enviromental review report to the Board you had recommended trip generation data. Mr. Lund has provided this data in his letter and it is being sent to you for review. If the data is sufficient and no further traffic study is required, the Board will proceed with a negative declaration an set the final heating. I will note in passing that Mr. Lund is a pleasure to work with and very professional in his work and in following up requested items. I hope to hear from you soon. Site Plan Reviewer Encl. ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES 4829 EAST LAKE HARRIET PARKWAY, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 P.O. BOXII34, WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 ARCHITECTS, LTD. (612) 927-0680 FAX (612) 927-0382 (516) 537-5500 FAX (516) 7254478 TRANSMITTAL TO: DATE: FROM: PROJECT NUMBER: Robert G. Kassner Site Plan Reviewer Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971-0959 (631) 765-1938 2-2-01 Robert Lund 9916 Peconic Bay Winery FEB 0 5 Souttt Town Planning Board ENCLOSED PLEASE FIND: 1. Letter dated 1-29-01 with responses to the Southold Board of Appeals conditions and the Environmental Review Assessment and updates on the Architectural Review Committee, the NYSDOT and the Suffolk County Department of Health. (Note: Additional items submitted since the drafting of the letter; see attachments with this transmittal). 2. Location and materials for roof penetrations are shown on A-5 Roof Plan and A-10 Exterior Elevations. 3. All A/C condensers are shown on A-5 and A-10 as well; all condensers are visually screened by roof parapets 4. Notification that all power, telephone, cable and miscellaneous utilities will be located underground. 5. Catalogue cuts for all exterior lights and building light locations shown on A-10 Exterior Elevation. 6. Signage colors are exactly the same as on the existing (previously approved) signage at the winery. A color photo of the sign is included with this submission for your records. 7. Letter dated January 31, 2001 from the Suffolk County Water Authority approving connections to city water. 8. One recent set of plans showing: PecOl_02_02tr A-1 revised square foot calculations and parking calculations A-2 showing revised NYSDOT requirements and vision obstruction triangles A-3 NYSDOT requirements C-1 civil engineering requirements - unchanged since last submission L-1 revised with vision obstruction triangles. L-2 - signage colom A-4 - unchanged A-5 roof penetrations and NC locations for Arch Review A-6 thru A-9 - unchanged A-10 Exterior Elevations showing exterior light locations and and types and roof penetrations A-11 thru A-17 - updated architectural drawings for pricing purposes only - no change for submission requirements Pec01_02_02tr ROBERT LUND RI A ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS. LTD. January 29, 2001 Mr. Robert Kassner Site Plan Reviewer Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971-0959 Application No. 4882 Lav-Cor Agricultural, Inc. Peconic Bay Winery Main Road Cutchogue, NY SCTM #100-103-19.1 & 19.2 FEB 05 Soulltdd'T F'b,mblgl Jdrd As requested in your letter of December 19, 2000 please find enclosed with this letter our responses to the variance conditions requested by the Southold Board of Appeals and our responses and additional information requested by the Town's Environmental Consultant. Additionally we will enumerate the status of approvals required from other agencies and committees concerned with this project and the estimated timetables for their completion. We will start with the latter. Architectural Review Committee: Approved on August 29, 2000 with the following conditions: 1. Provide location and materials for roof penetrations 2. Provide location and screening for AC compressors 3. Confirmation that power and utilities will be underground~ 4. Catalogue cuts for building mounted lighting fixtures 5. Provide samples ofthe stain forthe siding ~,$ ~o/'//) 6. Provide colors for the signage Items 1 through 6 to be sent to the Town this week, probably on Thursday, February 1, 2001. New York State Department of Transportation: The plans submitted are acceptable to the NYSDOT (see attached letter). The final revisions they requested have been completed and forwarded to the agency. A set of the revised'plans will be sent to the Town early this week. 4829 EAST [ IARRIET PARKWAY. M[NNEAPOL[S, MN 55409 1~ O. BOX 1134, WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 1612} 9270680 FAX: {612) 927-0382 (51 G) 537 5500 FAX: /~; I 6) 725-4478 The Contractor will submit the permit, permit fee, Surety Bond and liability insurance certificates this week. Suffolk County Department of Health: The Health Department has approved the test wells requested for the property. In addition to the//~, ~ well approval, they have requested that the Suffolk County Water Authority connect the new Tasting Barn to the new water main just installed along Route 25. (See enclosed letter). We are~,- waiting for a final approval letter from the Suffolk County Water Authority for that water main connection. Mr. John Milazzo, an attorney with SCWA is drafting the approval letter and has promised to send it to Mr. Gray (the Contractor) by January 31, 2001. His telephone number is (631) 589-5622. The Suffolk County Department of Health has given Mr. Gray verbal approval for the Health Permit. The only item outstanding, before they issue the official permit, is the SEQRA denial letter from the Town of Southold. ~ ~q r¢'t a~,~/ i 37 ~l/,~/~ -- Southold Board of Appeals: During a Board of Appeals meeting conducted on December 7, 2000 a resolution authorizing the construction ora 203-foot wide building, as submitted, was adopted. Conditions attached to the 1. As per Sec. 100.232, B. Southold Code: "There be no obstruction to vision at the entrance and exits to the property, and screening shall not exceed a height of 2 ½ feet above the average street level within and isosceles triangle having 30 foot sides along each street to preserve sight lines for traffic." We have relocated one existing LILCO pole, adjacent to the main entry drive, and relocated the post and rail fence and modified parking stalls at the farmstand/service drive to conform to the noted section of the Town Code. An existing 30" maple tree canopy is within the restricted vision area at the farmstand/service drive. Our preference is to preserve this tree. We believe with proper pruning the canopy it will not create a visual obstruction. However, if the Planning Board should so determine, we will remove the existing tree. Please see enclosed Sheets A-2 & L-I, issued January 24, 2001, for the revisions. Environmental Assessment Review: The Town of Southold retained Nelson, Pope & Voorhis (NP&V) for environmental review and planning consulting services for the Tasting Barn Site Plan Application. Before answering specific questions about the application, several issues need clarification. THE "RESTAURANT" - The first paragraph on page two tried "Proposed Project" states that the application involves "...the conversion of an existing farmhouse to a restaurant". Actually, the farmhouse conversion to a restaurant received Site Plan Approval in May of 1995. The farmhouse is a residence for employees of the vineyard and, at present, the Owners plan to continue using it as such. The only reason we have included the farmhouse is that we are requesting a slight change in the location (not in the number) for the previously approved parking (for that restaurant). We prefer altering these parking locations to save some of the significant trees to the west of the existing farmhouse and to allow for the relocation of the access from Route 25 to the new, Tasting Barn. Although the Owners have no present plans for the development of the farmhouse into a restaurant, they would prefer leaving the previous site plan appr~,val intact. ~/~ 2. PARKING STALLS - The second paragraph under "Proposed Project states that 107 stalls are required by code. We have planned for 99 paved stalls, with 38 "overload" unpaved stalls. We were unclear as to how NP&V arrived at the 107-stall number as we calculated a required stall nu~According to Charles Voorhis of NP&V, they added the number of stalls liste ond"~fi~ur submittal sheet A-1 for a total of 107 paved stalls. We should have been clearer on our Site Plan Data submission. Section 100-191 of the Town Zoning Code states that for a restaurant, the number of required spaces" ~ '~) space per 3 seats or 1 space per 100 square feet of floor space, whichever is greater..." J We calculated the number of stalls for the (previously approved) restaurant space using~, both methods called for in the Zoning Code (to show that our 15 stall number, the higl~iffr' number, was the number to be used in the calculations). NP&V added both the lower number andthe higher number to give 107. Just the higher number should have been~O added - giving an actual calculation number of 94 stalls required by Code. Specific responses to questions and issues raised by the Environmental Assessment Review are addressed as follows: 1. As per paragraph # 1, pg. 4 "Traffic Generation' of the Consultants Report we itting Trip Generation estimates (enclosed) for the proposed uses as well as anticipaten taours of Operation and estimated Delivery Vehicle size and time frames. The design program for the new Tasting Barn is based on an anticipated three-fold increase in visits to and purchases at the new facility. All program requirements within the building are based on that increase, and it is a reasonable assumption that vehicular traffic will reflect such an increase. · See Attached Vehicular Data, pages 4 and 5, of the enclosed letter. The third paragraph of Page 5 identifies a discrepancy in building square footage calculations between the Site Plan Data submitted on sheet A-1 and the data submitted by the Civil Engineers on sheet C-1 of 4,506 square feet. Once again our table headed "Site Plan Data" on sheet A-1 could have been clearer. The first 7 items listed under the "Exist Zoning" and "Proposed Building Area" deal with building footprint, not total building square footage. Further down the table, under "Proposed Number of Uses" the proposed Tasting Barn is identified as having 13,712 square feet. On sheet C-l, we did not check the numbers supplied by the Civil Engineer. The discrepancy of 1,053 square feet is the result of the Engineer's inclusion of exterior circulation spaces on the east and west ends of the main tasting barn. To clarify any possible misunderstanding regarding project and building square footage data we would like to submit the following data for clarification. Note: The total sizes of the building and various spaces have been revised to reflect finalized design development drawings. (See Sheet A-I for revisions and the enclosed CAD drawing showing the total Tasting Barn footprint and the size breakdown of the different spaces). · 2,500 1~.2 - estimated total floor area for existing Tasting Barn (NP&V Report) · 2,459 t~.2 - actual total floor area for existing Tasting Barn (Sheet A-2) 10,515 fi? - current total final building area (footprint) of proposed Tasting Barn as defined in Sec. 100-13, B. "Building Area" (Sheets A-l, A-2) vs. 10,259 square feet in initial submission · 12,832.8 ft.2 -- current total floor area of proposed Tasting Barn as defined in Sec. 100-13, B. "Floor Area" (Sheet A-l) vs. 13,712 square feet in initial submission 18,174 ft.2 _ current total building area (footprint) including all existing and proposed buildings on site (except the existing tasting barn which will be removed, see sheet A-I) vs. 17,918 square feet in initial submission · 14,765 ft.2 _ total floor area used in water use calculations (Sheet C-1). This number is 1,932.2R.2 greater than the current 12,832.8-fi.2 total floor area stated on Sheet A-1. 3. Parking Requirements - revised for current, finalized design development drawings. · Storage · Office, Business · Retail Beverage Distribution · Total Parking Required 5,483 s.f. ~ 1 space/100 s.f. = 1,131 s.f. ~ 1 space/100s.f. = 6,218 s.fi ~ 1 space/150 s.f. = 6 spaces 12 spaces 42 spaces 60 /J spaces New Tasting Barn - Projected Vehicular Data Note: While the F~house~es~urant is listed in ~ese calculations it has previously obtained site plan approval under another application (~ted May 8, 1995). It is only included in this application for reference to and confomance with the new proposed Tasting B~. Lav-Cor Agricultural is not seeking approyal for the Famhouse/Restaurantproject. T~15 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~L~ ~ Hours of Operation by Use Winery (Production Facility, Offices and Vineyard) 7 am to 5pm Monday - Sunday (Daily) Visitors (Specialty Retail, Gifts & Tasting Bar) 11 am to 5pm Monday - Sunday (Daily) Restaurant (if implemented) 1 lam to 2:30pm & 6pm to 10pm Monday - Sunday (Daily) Trip Generation - Estimates Based on Peak ti~nes of Late September / October Winery(Production Facility, Offices, Storage and Vineyard) Employees Visitors Trucks (12' - 16' van) Trucks (65' semi) (production, delivery) 4 Cars / day 0 Cars / day 1 Truck / day .5 Truck / month - morning delivery Visitors (Specialty Retail & Tasting Bar) Employees Guests Delivery Vans (UPS, Fed Ex) 6 Cars / day 150 Cars / day 1 Van / day - afternoon delivery 4 Restaurant (Phase II) Employees & Guest 10 Cars (enter + exit) ~ Peak Weekday 4 - 6pm* 15 Cars (enter + exit) ~ Peak Saturday 12 - 2pm* The anticipated length of stay in the new Tasting Barn is 30 minutes. The anticipated peak weekday activity is 25 cars between 3-5pm, generating 50 (entry + exit) trips, or 25 directional trips per peak hour. The anticipated peak weekend activity is 150 cars on autumn Saturdays, between 12:00 and 5:00pm, generating 300 (entry + exit) trips, or 75 directional trips per peak hour. The Institute of Transportation Engineers and the NYSDOT threshold for initiating a traffic study is 100 Directional Trips per peak hour. On the busiest Saturday afternoon, with both visitors and employees leaving the Tasting Barn, the maximum number of trips, during the last hour of operation would be 75 (Tasting Barn) + 4 Employees (Winery) + 6 Employees (Tasting Barn) -or 85 trips. The threshold for instituting a traffic study according to the Institute of Transportation Engineers & NYSDOT is 100 Directional Trips / Peak Hr. Additionally, as noted on page one of this letter, the NYSDOT has approved the entry way relocation and new curb cuts without the instigation of a traffic study. Misc. Site Information The Institute of Transportation Engineers recommends, in its Guidelines for Driveway Location and Design (1987), a minimum distance of 50' (including curb radii) between access drives for industrial property; commercial driveways require even less separation. The Tasting Barn access drives are separated by 145' and have received approval by NYSDOT. Removal of the existing tasting barn entry driveway mitigates congestion at the intersection conflict with King Kullen. All of the existing agricultural traffic will remain on-site. 75% of off-site storage will return on-site, thereby decreasing truck traffic between the winery and storage areas around the Town. *Based on data supplied in the 12/1994 traffic study for the proposed "Island Ale" brewpub. located adjacent to the restaurant property. Study conducted by Nelson and Pope, Melville, NY Distribution: Mr. Robert Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer - Town of Southold Mr. and Mrs. Paul Lowerre Mr. Matt Gillies, Manager - Peconic Bay Winery Ms. Angela Fowler, Landscape Architect Mr. Ronald Gray, Graystone Builders 5 AF'FI. No. 4~2 Lay-Cot A~nculbural, (nc. Pecomc Da), January 24.200 New Tast:~n~I Darn R~.~e,d 5~luar¢ Foot~,~e TOTAL DUll. DING RET/~L 3009,75 (~) TOTAL FLOOP-, AP-,EA - ,SECOND FLOOP, STORAGE - 122(;.34 5.f. Ri-rAIL - 3009.75 STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, N.Y. 1 1'788 CRAIG SIRACUSA, PE. REGIONAL DIRECTOR JOSEPH H. BOARDMAN COMMISSIONER December 26, 2000 Mr. Robert Lund Robert Lund Associates 4829 East Lake Harriet Parkway Minneapolis, Mn. 55409 Dear Mr. Wolpert: Your September 8, 2000 Submission Peconic Bay Winery Route 25, Cutchogue Our Case No. 00-233P This is in regard to the site plans for the above noted project which were re-submitted to us for review. The revised plans are acceptable with the exception of the Maintenance and Protection of Traffic scheme. The reduced speed and flagman signs are to be removed from the detail shown on the plan. Please resubmit three copies ora revised plan addressing our comment. Prior to issuing a Highway Work Permit, you must submit the required permit fee and Surety Bond (sample enclosed). It is also mandatory that the protective liability insurance be provided by the permitted. This must be accomplished b~either submitting a completed Perml7q, C rtsflcate of Insurance m accordance w~th Optson A (form enclosed), or by submitting the fee specified below tO be covered under the NYSDOT Blanket Policy. Complete the enclosed Highway Work Permit Application and return with above. In recent years, many states have employed access management as a major technique to address conflicts between through traffic and that generated by developments. The goals of access management are limited to the number of access points, separate conflicts points and remove turning traffic from through movements. New York State is utilizing this technique to minimize impacts to State highways. We recommend, therefore, that cross access to this site be obtained from adjacent properties. If this not possible, it should be shown on plans for implementation as part of future redevelopment. Mr. Robert Lund December 26, 2000 Page 2 This permit application should also be sensitive to the unique visual and historic settings of the Long Island North Shore Heritage Area, which runs from the Queens/Nassau County Line to Orient Point and from Route 25 or 1-495, whichever is father south, north to the Long Island Sound. All checks issued to the State of New York must show a Federal Identification Number. Highway Work Permit: Permit Fee (Payable to "State of New York"): $ 550.00 Bond Amount: $15,000.00 Insurance Fee: $175.00 Question concerning this case shall be directed to Mr. Vito Lena at 952-6020. All re-submittals must be reference to our case number and the County tax number. Very truly yours, Ci,zil Engineer Iii Traffic Engineering and Safety cc: Ms. Valorie Scopaz, Town of Southold Mr~ Raymond Jacobs, Town of Southold AWB:VFL:JS 2001 9: 16RM HP LASERJET 3200 631 S37-84i6 p.2 COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ROBERT J. GAFFNEY DEPARTMENT OF I-]~,ALI~ SERa. rICES January 16, 200l ML R. on Gray c,/o Graystone Build~a P.O. l~x 1768 Bridgelum~ton, NY 11932 Pecon/c Bay Wimry Test Well Sample #: H~,alt~ D~pt l~f. # T~ ~p ~ S~ date: ?R00-1070 (NC00-2480) CI0-00-0013 Exi~n$ well-fairing a~ea cold water ~ap/no 1000-103-1-19.11 1 Dear Mr. Gray: Ti~ above referenced w~ll hm been sampled and ~e ~1~ ~ ~ys~ is ~1o~ fm yo~ rexSew. w~ res~ ~ ~en f~ w Mr. ~ at o~ ~cc of W~wat~ M~t ~h~d ~ ~r. ~s ~lc wm ~ m ~ of~ o~ce's re~ ~ m~tor No~ ~blic Wa~ S~pli~ m ~o~ ~ puget to Su~p~ 5.1 of ~ New Yo~ S~ ~ta~ Code. S~ m ~ a f~ mo~ of your r~ for a I~t well ~ o~ce ~ d~ided to accept ~se r~[ts ia ~u of ~g ~ ~difi~l ~ple. Accor~y, we ~ ~=~n~g yo~ ~eck of ~0. ~ advi~d ~ ff~ s~[~afi~ is ~t a~mved ~&& one ye~ o~e ~ of'~e s~l~ (l 0/~000) you may ~ re~r~ ~ ~su~t ~ ~afion f~ ~ test we~ ~d ~e S6~ f~ wo~d ~ be ~ A~ sioce ~k ~m ~ ~t ~ hc~ ~ ~ve ~ead ~ ~ e~n of ~s~g ro~ .... Prlwte ~u~t ~ (PRO0-1070) av~ble ~n w~ ~qu~ to ~s 0~ conce~ ~w~er Sin~rdy, ZI Senio* Public Healt~ Samtartan Bureau dl~mlang Water end.- re~ull~ cc: R. Reyuoki~-SCDHg-OWM R. Farme:r-SCDHS-BDW JRM 2~ 2001 9:IGRM Graystone HP LRSERJET 3200 Builders Inc. P,O, Box 1768, 2228 Montauk Highway, Brid~ehampton, NY 11932 (631) 537-1414 · Fax (631) 5374416 Bob Sec ~aclosed Health Dept letter regard/ng test of well water, Although water test results wexe not included, I was told that they were OK(I have requested a copy). Note that this letter acknowledges new water main and requests that the SCWA connect us to that main. I ~na awaiting approval fi-om SC-~h'A. Mr. Iohn Milazzo aa attorney with SCWA is drafting that letter and promised me I would have approval by 31J.A.N01.. His phone # (~ SCWA is 631-589-5622. Compact Floodlight Applications ~eed ~ be ~ed ~c=use o, ~he OFUs co~-pao~ s,ze The quality you expect from Kim Lighting in a compact, yet full featured luminaire. r. nglneerea ~ ~ same ,~ I gM LIGh'TING OrdeHng Information Fixture, lamp mode, voltage, and finish are described by a single number sequence as illustrated below. Exampte: Fixture Series~ c~-Lamp Mode ~ F-Voltage~ ~-Finlsh CFLI/70MH 120/DB-P 50W, high pressure sodiurc 120 1.80 CFLII50HPS1201Finish E17 clear, medium base 277 0.78 CFL'II50HPS2771Finish 70W, high pressure sodiurr 120 2.35 CFLl170HPSI201Finish Et7, clear, medium base 277 1.02 CFLl170HPS2771Finish BL-P 50W, metal halide 120 1.57 CFLl150MH1201Finish B~.¢< E17, clear, medium base 277 0.68 CFLl150MH2771Finish 70W, metal halide 120 2.65 CFLII70MHI201Fin/sh DB-P E17, clear, medium base 277 1.15 CFLl170MH2771Finish o~<B,o~ze 13W, compact fluorescent 120 0.44 CFLtI13PL1201F~hish LG-P Twin tube, GX23 base 277 0.34 CFL1113PL2771Fieish u¢~Gr~y 28W compact fluorescent 120 0,60 CFLl128PL1201Finish Quad tube, GX32d-3 base VG-P 32W compact fluorescent 120 0.30 CFLII32PL1201Fmish Tdpletube, GX24q-3base 277 0.13 CFLII32PL2771F~hish WH-P 60W incandescent 120 I - CFLII6OINCIF~hish I wh~ T10 I.F., medium base 150W ma x. halogen 120 C FL1/150HAL IFinish T4 clear, mini-can base Specifications Electrical Components. Factory mounted in housing and prewired with leads extending from swivel. U,L. and CSA recognized components with nominal power factor ballast for all H.ID and 13 watt fluorescent High power factor ballast for 28 and 32 watt fluo rescent Fixture wiring: No 18 AWM rated 105°C with braided copper ground wire. Housing One piece die cast aluminum in a cylindrical shape wi~h cooling fins over the entire length, and 100' minimum wall thickness. One piece sit- icone gasket between housing and lens frame Lens Frame One piece die cast aluminum with integral cool~ng fins, ,100' minimum wall lhlckness, mates with housing to create a continuous cylindrical shape 5/32" thick clear tempered glass lens is sealed 1o the lens frame by a one piece stamped silicone gasket. Lens frame secures ~o housing by two stainless steel recessed captive allen-head screws. Swivel Die cast anodized aluminum with integral locking teeth providing 6° adjustment intervals Stainless steel allen-head locking screw and '/~" NPSM heavy duty stainless steel nipple for mounting Reflector H.LD,, iNC, & HAL.: Formed specular Alzak® alu- minum, peened, Fluorescent: Formed specular Alzak® aluminum, Sockets H.I.D. and INC.: 4KV porcelain medium base with 200°C leads. Halogen: %4 Mini-can quartz (El 1 base) with 200°C leads. Ruorescent: 13 wait PL (Gx23 base), 28 watt PL (Gx32D-3 base), 32 watt PL (GX24q-3 base), all with 105°C leads Finish Housing, lens frame, and swivel are Super TGIC Thermoset Polyester Powder-Coat Paint, BL-P (Black), DB-P (Dark Bronze), LG-P (Light Gray), VG-P (Verde Green), WH-P (White). t20° 2 Klm Lighting Wall luminaires Housing: Two piece die cast aluminum with extruded aluminum arm and die cast canopy supplied with a universal mounting bracket for direct attachment to a 3~/2' or 4' octagonal wldn9 box A die cast aluminum round "rotation" plate allows the housing [o be precisely leveled (or rotated) after installation, Enclosure: Hand blowR, seamless, three-ply opal glass with screw neck. Molded high temperature silicone rubber O-dng gasket for weather tight operation Spun a~uminum shade with rolled reinforcing edge, painted white inside. Electrical: Lampholders: incandescent and H.I.D. are medium base porcelain with nickel plated screw shell supplied with 200~C high temperature leads. Incandescent rated 600V, H.I,D. pulse rated 4KV. Fluorescent are type GX23-2 (13W), rated 75W, 250V. Ballasts: Compact fluorescent and MH are magnetic, HPF, available in 120V or 277V - specify. Finish: Standard finish is an eight step process consisting of two coats of black or white high solids, UV stabilized polyurethane, one with light texture over a phosphate t~ase, Custom colors supplied on special order. U.L. listed, suitable for wet locations. Type: BEGA Product #: Project: Voltage: Color: Options: Modified: Wall luminaires with die cast aluminum radius bracket arm and canopy. Three*ply opal glass with screw neck, Color: Black or white, Lamp Lumen A B C ]~-~ ,,~ 6590 Wall I 60W A.19 890 101/4 14Y2 12%6 6548P Wall 1 13W PLC 860 10Y. 14Y~ 12%~ [~;~-'~6393 Wall 1 100W A.19 1750 15¥4 279A~ 24~3/~ 6394S Wall t 50W E17HPS 4000 15¥. 27¥~s 24~3/~¢ Wail tuminaires with flared shade, die cast aluminum radius bracket arm and canopy. Three-ply opal glass with screw neck. Color: Black or white. Lamp Lumen A B C 6491 Wali 1 60W A t9 890 12¥~ 14V2 13Y~ 6492P Wa~l 1 13W PLC 860 12%~ 14V~ 13¥~ 6493 Wall 1 100W A19 1750 19~Y~¢ 27¥~ 27¥~ 6494S Wall 1 50W E17 HPS 4000 19W~¢ 27% 27% BEGA/US 1000 BEGA Way, Carpinteria, CA 93013 [P] 8056840533 [Fl 805684.6682 Recessed ceiling luminaires - stainless steel Fully enclosed luminaires for down lighting applications; outdoor entrances under canopies, over food service or display areas or ~n other locations where the extra protection of enclosed lamps may be desirable. These luminakes are designed for the highly efficient CMH, Ceramic Metal Halide or Tungsten Halogen PAR20, 30 & 38 lamps Housing: Constructed of extruded and die cast aluminum Roughgn housing constructed of galvanized steel with through wiring box and support yoke Enclosure: A~l stainless steel faceplate Clear 3/~6" thick tempered glass; Facepla~e is secured by four (4) rial socket head, stainless sleel, captive screws threaded into stainless steel inserts in the housing In~ernal perforated stainless steel baffle for glare control. Continuous high temperature gasket for weather tight operation, Electrical: Lampholder: Incandescent; Medium base porcelain with nickel plated copper screw shell with high temperature 200°C leads H.kD. pulse rated 4KV, Ballast: Encapsulated, magnetic, HPF available in 120V or 277V - specify, Through Wiring: Maximum of four (4) No. 12 AWG conductors (plus ground) suitable for 75°C. Two 7/~, knockouts provided for VZ conduit, Finish: #4, light satin stainless steel. U,L. lisled, suilable for wet locations. Type: BEGA Product #: Project: Voltage: Color: Options: Modified: Recessed ceiling luminaires with brushed stainless steel trim. Clear tempered glass Perforated stainless steel baffle. Suitable for wet locations Lamp Lumen A B C 6940/541 1 50W PAR20 650 4~/, 7~A 15 6940MH/541MH 1 g9W PAR20 MH 2300 4¥4 7~A 15 ¢?,6941/561 1 75W PAR30 940 6~A6 7~A 15 6941MH/561MH 1 70W PAR30 MH 4500 65A~ 7~A 15 6942J571 1 90W PAR38 1280 9¥2 9~ 16Y2 6942MH/571MH 1 100W PAR38 MH 6800 9V2 9% 16V~ BEGA/US 1000 BEGA Way, Carpinteria, CA 93013 [P] 805684.0533 [FI 805684-6682 Recessed wall luminaires - stainless steep Enclosure; All stainless steel faceplate,3/~6' thick Va' thick, tempered glass; clear with white translucent ceramic coating (open); clear, etched, (behind louvers) Faceplate is secured by lwo (2) fiat socket head, weather tight operation Electrical: Lampholder: G23 (5W/7W/9W), GX23 (13W), 2-pin, rated 75W, 600V, Ballast: Magr~etic, HPF available in 120V or 277V - specify. Through Wiring: Maximum of four (4) No 12 AWG conductors (plus ground) suitable for 75°C. Two 7/¢ knockouts provided for V2' conduiL Type: BEGA Product Cf: Project: Voltage: Color: Options: Modified: A steel faceplate and white diffusers. Finish: #4 satin stainless steel. Lamp Lumen A B C 2030P Recessed ~ 1 5W PL 250 7½ 3~ 4 2031P Recessed ~ 1 7/9W PL 400/600 10% 3~6 4 2032P Recessed ~ t t3W PL 900 12~ 3~ 4 Recessed luminaires with stainless steel faceplate with integral louvers and etched tempered · C ' glass diffusers. Finish: #4 satin stalnless steel Lamp Lumen A B C 2035P Recessed ~ t 5W PL 250 7~/5 33A~ 4 ~-'~ 2036P Recessed ~ 1 7/9W PL 400/600 10% 33/,6 4 2037P Recessed ~ 1 13W PL 900 12~/4 3%s 4 BEGA/US 1000 BEGA Way, Carpinteria, CA 93013 [PI 805 684.0533 [FI 805.684.6682 ©Copyright BEGA/US 2000 updated 2/00 KlM LIGHTING Square Hood EL210 120 Volt Die-Cast Aluminum, PAR38 Incandescent / Halo§eY1 revision 8/4/99 · el210.pdf Type: Job: Fixture Catalog number: Mounting Options: Approvals: Date: Page: 1 of 3 Specifications Housing and Shield: Die-cast aluminum. Swivel: Die-cast aluminum with locking teeth and V~' NPT plus solid brass Iocknut for mounting. Clear anodized prior to chromate conversion coating for added corrosion resistance. Gasket: Silicone lamp gasket. Socket: Pomelain medium base. Wiring: No. 18AWM rated 105°C. Finish: Super TGIC thermoset polyester powder coat paint, 2.5 mil nominal thickness, applied over a chmreate conversion coating; 2500 hour salt spray test endurance rating; Standard colors are Black (SL), Dark Bronze (DB), Verde Green (GR), and White (WH). Certification: UL Listed to U.S. and Canadian safety standards for wet locations. Fixture manufacturer shall employ a quality program that is audited to ISO9001 standards. ORDERING INFORMATION Fixture Finish [] EL210BL Black [] EL210DB Dark Bronze [] EL210GR Verde Green [] EL210WH White Wattage / Lamp 150W PAR38 Incandescent / Halogen 999 KlM LIGHTING INC. · P.O. BOX 6CO80, CITY OF INDUSTRY, CA 91716-0080 * TEL: 626/968-5666 · FAX: 626/369-2695 5623499213 FEB 02 2001 9:lSRM ~LRSER3ET 3200 S31 537-841~ p. I Michael R. Frank ~or Coet~mer $etu~e SUFFOLK COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY A~060 Sur~rts~ Highway, Oakdale, New Yor~ 11769 Fax (631) 58,%0358 lan~. · 31,2001 Mr. Ron Gray Graystono ~ildera P,O. Bo~ 1768 'B~idge~ NY 11932 Application for water service, Peeoaie lay Winery S/s Main Road, Cutchogue, SCTM~ 1000-103-1-19.002 and 19.011 Fire ~ and 1½" Domestic Sa'vice fSCWA) ~cords indicate that ~he parocl is locami wifl~n ~m area of public wa~cr serv~c and a water main f~ ~om oft. he parcel. Water is cummtly availabl~ for additional hook-ups. Howover, given tho currmt demand for veate~ and limited capaoit'y of li~ $CWA's North Fork system, SCWA cannot 8uar~*~e that water will be available for thi~ parcel at tho time you wish ~o hook-up. There/ore, SCWA does not om,~rmatce water service for this parcel before Sel~a~er, 2001, and any activity undemken imor lo that da~e which requires public wator s~rvic~ is l~k~ at your own risk. This l~l~r af availab~'ty is not to b~ considered an action by SCWA as defined b~ tttc Ncw York State Environmental Ouali~, l~vi~w Act mgulatiom or a de~rminaIicn that tile parcel is ~pptovM for building. · you_ am ~ibl¢ for 0btalni~_~ any other l~'mits or a~proval$1hat may b¢ r~quir~ ~or tl~ project. SCWA ah,Il not be roquimd to provide water for thc proj~ until all r~luirod approvals have been obtained. You muat eoota~t tho $CWA's R~ional Manager in We~hampt~a at 631-258-I 034 f~r tllgl!ldil~ f~at'dln~ thc f~, ~ COi'KlitiollS Of~O/i~ arid/]2¢ li~ Dom Roberts, R~gional Mana~r 0CT-22-2808 zz=23 5t6 425 &25~ P,Oz×I8 FAX COVER SHEET Phone: Fax; From: Date: Re: No. of Pages: (including Cover) Roberi Kassner 765-1938 (631) 765-3136 Shana Lacey October 12, 2000 Peconic Bay Vineyards, Site Plan Application review 16 Comments: Attached please find the environmental and plan_~ng review for the above referenced site plan application. Please let me know if you have any questions or require additional information. Thanks, Shana EAF Part I Rmt~ NP&¥ ~03M ENVIRONMENTAL A$$£$$~vIENT [~t~VIEW ENVIRONMENTAl. AND PLANNING CONSmERATION5 PECONIC ]]AY VINEYARDS ~ PECONIC Prepared by: Town of $outhold Town Hall 53095 Main Ro~ $outhelcl, New York 11971-0959 Nelson, Pope & Voorhis, LLC 57'2 Walt WhiUnan Road Melville, New York 11747 Date: October 10, 2000 The Town of St~old Planning Board has retaincd Nelson, Pope & Voorhis, LLC (Nrp&v) for environmental an~i planning consulting services in review of the above referenced site plan application. As cm'rentty proposed, the application involves the removui of an existing tasting barn to allow for the oonstruotion of a new wine. ry tasting barn, the conversion of an existing farmhonsc to a restaurant (Phase II; subject of future site plan amendmcai), and the reconfigaration attd expansion of a gravel access drive/parking arcs to a paved acc,~sslparlchg area. Two new sanitary l~aching fields will also be installed as a result of thc proposed project. Under existing conditions, the majority of the site conststs of a vineyard, with a tasting barn, go, rage, sh~d, barn, farmhouse, farm stand and winery production building located along the site's/~tontag¢ on Main Road. This doct~nent analyzes the site and area r~sources including topography, soils, wa~er, land we, zoning and transportation and othcr available information, The site has also been inspected for "nvitonmcnta.t~planniug constraints. In addition, the fall FAF Part I submitted with the application has been corrected and is attached herein. Location and Site Overview' The pmjcc! site is located on the south side of Main Road (NYS l~,tc 25), approximately $20 fcct cast of Stillwater Avenue in ?~conic, Town of Sonthold, County of Suffolk. The subjcct prepay can be more particularly al©scribed as SCTM number 1000-103-01- 19.2 and 19.11 (which were merged in lua¢ of 2000). The property has approximately 727.23' of road frontage along Main Road, and approximately 200' ofroatl frontage on Stillwater Avenue. The majority of thc site consists of a vineyard, and contains a winery tastinl/barn, a Fam~ouse, barn, garage, shed, farm stand, and a winery production building near the site's frontage on Main Road. The OCT- I2-28~0 2 .i.: 24 516 425 125'7 P.03/18 ~mi~: Bay' Vineyards ~ EAF Part I P.m, it~v property does net appear to contain wetlands or significant geologic features, although tidal wetlands arc located adjacent to the southern portion of the property beyond the existinil vin~ard property, wi'rich will not be altered as s result of this project. This rcxiew will discuss the proposed project and its potential impact on thc land rc~UrCes. prot~osefl P~oicct As currently proposed, the application involves thc removal of an existing lasting barn to allow for the cor~truction of a new winery tasting barn, the conversion cf ma existing fm~ouse to a restaurant, and the removal of' the existing g~avel access drive/parking area m allow for the reconfiguraticn and expansion of a paved access drive and parking area. The proposed action v411 also require the installation of two new sanitary systems, The project will be phased in two sections as follows: Pha~e I con~ist~ of the removal of the existinii 2,500 s.f. tasting barn and the construction of a 10,259 s.f. t/~,-l~ barn, which will consist of office and storage areas, as well as retail beverage distribution. It should be noted that the buildin/area f~' the proposed lasting barn is variously reported as 13,712 s.f. (Sheet l) and 14,765 s.f. (Sheet 3) on the proposed site plan; it is recommended that the buildi~l~ area be conectly identified throughout the proposed plalls, Currimtly, the existing tasting barn has a separate access and associated 8reval parkin~ area from the remainder of the site. This access will be removed as part of' the proposed project, with all tra~c directed toward thc main site access near the existing dwelling/proposed restaurant. The total parkir~ provided on site will be expanded from approximately 30 stalls to 99 parking stalls, with an additional 38 overflow spaces provided. A total of 107 stalls is required by code. The proposed perkins areas and access drive will be paved, as ~omparcd to the gravel found under existing conditions. Phase II consists of :he conversion of the existing farmhouse into a 46 seat (1,300 s.£) restaurant. Each proposed structure will be two (2) stories in height. The existing winery pwducfion building, shed, garage, barn, and farm stand will remain following development. The proposed action will involve development only within the Genera Business (B) zoned portion of the site, or the 5.684 acres with frontage on Main Read. The proposed building area totals I'7,918 s.i', or 7.:2% lot coverage within the G-ener~I Business (B) zoned portion of the site (when utilizing a building area of 10,259 s.f. for th~ proposed tasting barn). According to the site plan, approximately 68% of the developm~t area (General Business District) will be landscaped. Land Use and Zoning The project site is located in an area ~hat is dominated by commercial, residential, and agricultural uses. Utilities, a cemetery and limited undeveloped vacant land also exists in the immediate vicinity. The proposed application is somewhat consistent with surro~ding uses and thc existing site use, however the action involves a si/nificant expansion (24%) of an existing '~c, as well as a increase in the intensi~ of use on site. Thc majority or,he site consists ora cult/veer vineyard, which will remain following development. 425 12b~T P.04/18 Approximately 5,684 acres of the site fronting on Main Road is zoned General Business 05), with the remaining 21.347 acres zoned Low-Dei~ity Resid~tial (R-80). Development in the R- 80 zoning district requires a minimum lot size of 80,000 SF, or just slightly less than 2 acres, with a maximum permitted lot coverage of 20% of the lot area. The minimum lot size in the General Business (B) district is 30,000 s.f,, with an allowable lot cov~ragu of 30%. Building height is limited to 35 feet and 35% office property is required to be !an&scape& Dimensional setbacks are as follows: Front yard 150 t'ml, side yard 25 feet (both, 50 feet), and mar yard 3:5 feet. As previously stated, the proposed action involv*s development only wi*,i,, the G~neral Buainess (B) zoned portion of the property. Additional requirememts a~ set forth in thc Town code regarding winery operations include tile followillg: that th~ wine~ is licensed under NYS law from which wine made from primarily Long IsLand grapes is produced and sold; that retail sales exist on site; and that site plan approval bc obtained, No a~ditional "bulk" requirements for these types of structures are specified in the Code. Therefore, the proposed apphoation is consistent with the dimensional zoning requirements within the Genecal Business 05) zoning district and no variances appear necessary, However, it should be noted tat the existing dwelling maintaim a 52 foot front yard sethauk and does not meet the setback requiremant as specified by code; the conversion of this structure into a restaurant increases the intensity of use closer to the site frontage than would typically be allowed. This change to a more intense use which causes non.conformance with the front yard setback; this should be considered in terms of the need for a variance. The sumoaudLng ar:as conmln a mix of zoning classifications. Typically, the properties whi~ front on Main Road in the immediate vicinity o£the site are zoned B Business, with an LB zoned parcel m~d ap. RO zoned parcel located to the ~ast, and an RO zoned property and HB zoned properties to the west, The $outh6i'i'l portion of the site is zoned R-S0, as are the properties to the east. R-40 zoning is dominant to the south, west, and farther sot,theast along East Creek H~ Business is dominant along Main Road west of the site. Land use in the general area is predominantly commercial, residential and agricultural, and appears to reflect current zoning regulations. A lighting plan and lighting d~tails are provided. Li~ting appears to be directed inward into the property with aoce~ lighting in appropriate locations, Illumination diagrams re not provided; however, thc applicant should ensure that illumination do~s not extend beyond property lines and hours of lighting are minimized to that which is n~ccssar~ to maimain safety and access, In s. mmary, with respect to land use, thc proposed project is similar to the commercial uses that from on Main Road, and a winery/restaurant is an allowable use within the General Business (B) zoning district. However, the proposed action involves a 24% expansion of an existing use, and the proposed restaurant also increases the intca~ity of use on the site, which may create cumulative impacts along this portion of Main Road, Thc proposed restaurant does not meet the front yard setback reqnimments, although the structure is non-conforming under existing conditions. Minimal impacts would be expected to the surrounding r~idential us~ as the proposed development will occur along the Main Road frontage. Pa~ S T~affic '.Generation The proposed addition to the exitiing vin%~rd is ~i~ific~t ~d wffi n~e~m~ ~co~g · o zoning codes, ~c construction of a le~ 107 p~n~ spies. ~i~ ~r~ts a t~c fold morose E on-site parking. Thc applic~t should pro,de vcMc~ar trip g~rafion for ~c pwpoied uses of~ site based ~on obse~aions a simil~ ~s of~d ~e M ~e To~ of Southo!d. The veMcul~ ~p gcn~afion ~ sMuld be caegofi~d to diff~fiate w~e~, vislto~, ~d ~taur~l trips. Thc da~ ~ould include thc ~ficipat~ ho~ of option ~ o~er ~n~lcnl info~aion. ~c vcMcul~ ~p i~on ~! ~11 ~ble ~ To~ of Soutold to eval~te whe~cr ~r not a ~c impact study will be r~. ~o~fion reg~d ~o ~c n~b~ ~d size of the ~cks s~uld be prcsent~, in ad~tion to dcliv~ time f~es. The majority of the stle is relatively fiat, with the existing slopes bctwccn approximately 0-10%. However, there at~ relatively steep slopes in the ~uthwestcxn coroer of the property adjacent to Stillwater Avenue. This area rises in elevation .from 10' to 22' above mean sea level (rosl), as indicted on the site plan. Additionally, a small drainage swale is located in thc southern posen of thc site, kading to a altair, age culvert on the north side of me private roadway forming the southern property boundar,/o£ the site. Thc majority of the site lies at an elevation of between approximateiy 18' to 50' above msl. Tho property does not contain any additional significent landforms or t~eo[ogical lea;utes. The Suffolk County Soil Survey (Warner, 1975) identifies several soil types on the subject si;e, which consist cf the followin§; Haven loam, 0 to 2% slopes (HaA), Haven loam, 2 to 8% slopes (Haft), Riverhead sandy Ion, 3 to 8% slopes (RdB), and Carver and Plymouth sands, $ to 15% slopes (CpE). Those areas proposed for development will occur on HaA and HaB soils. The Haven Loam s~ies is desmibed within the Suffolk Count7 Soil Survey as land which is s~,itable for development, witt,, good leaching potential. The hazad of ~rosion hazard is slight on HaA soils, with moderate to slight erosion hazards on t-laB soils, The Rivet'fieafl series consists of deep, well-drained rooderately coarse textures soils that formed a mantle of sandy loam or fine sandy loam over thick layers oi'coarse sand and gravel (Warner, 1975), The soil survey lists the erosion hazard for RdB is roodexate m slight and the main concerns of management arc controtlinB runoff and erosion and providing ad~uate rooisture for landscaplng/agricuiture. The C~ver sene~ eonmst~ of deep, excessively drained, coarse-texturezt soils. The hazard of erosion is moderate to severe on the CpE soils, which are drought3', and fertility is low. Moderately steep m steep slopes are a limitation to use, The soil survey also depicts an "unclassified intenninem sa'cam" and two "wet spots" located in th~ southero portion of the property. The intermittent stream is associated with the small drainage swale mentioned above. The topo~'aphy and soils within the proposed development area do no~ appear to present severe devclopmero constraints for the proposed project. 516 425 1257 P.OE,?18 Water Resources public water is supplied to the general area by the Suffolk County Water Authority, although the site itself is not specifically connected to public water, The nearest water main is 16" in diameter anti begins on Mmin Reed cast of the site, just wast of Bridge Lane. The water main extends northeastward along Main Road. Thc nearest weIlfield is the Mill Lane Well Field & Pump Station, located on the northwest comer of'Middle Road (CR 48) and Mill Lane intersection, It is expected that the s/to is currently connected to on-site wells for irrigation and water consumption. The site plan intricates that the new wine tastin8 building will utilize a n~w private well for water s~pply, Sanitary disposal within the proposed project is expected to be managed by c. onvantional on.site septic tank-leaching pool system~. In 1978, the Long Island Regional Plauning Board published The Long Island Comprehensive Waste Treahment Manag~raent Plan (208 Srady). The 208 Study identified eight (8) hydrogeologic zones in Nassau and Suffolk Courfli~. These zones wer~ distiflgui~hed based upon differences in underlying groundwater flow pattens and water quality. The subject site is located within $CDH$ C. aoundwatez Management Zone IV, which accordin$ to Article VI of the Suffolk Cotmty Sanihary Code, has sat allowable flow of 600 gallons per day (gpd) per acre in ar~$ served by public water. Therefore, the allowable nitrogan bearing flow for the 27.031 acre silo is 16,219 glad. The sanitary desigt~ flow is computed using SCDHS manual Standards for Apprm,a! of Plato and Comtruetion for Sewage Di,~po~al &stems for Other Than Single Family ReMdenee& A~ indicated on the site plal~ the dr~ign flows were established aa follows: WA'l'r.~ USE StFUcturos Area Multiplier Water Generation Existin$ Farm Stand "312 s.f. 0,05 igd 15J'6 Stora$¢ ..... ~ 2,338 s.£ 0,04 figd 93.~2 Existing winet'y Building I 2,090 s,t~ ~[__ 0~.~, ~d 8~.6 glad Proposed Restaurant ', 46 seats[ 10 gpd~ieat 1,380 _._ 20 ~d&/tchen Proposed Tasting Barn ........ Offices 940 s.f. ... I 0.06 ~ ~ 56.4 gpd S ge [ °.04 I ..... ae=,il e, ge i,t: ..... ,000S.r. i 0.05 I -- IOIAL It should be noted that the square footage for the proposed tasting barn utilized in the calculations above totals 14,765 s.f., or 4,506 s.£ greater than stated on Sheet 1 of thc site plan. Bas~ on these calculations, the proposed winery operation would conform with Article VI of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code and would not be expected to adversely aff~ct groundwater quality provided properly functioning systems are designed and installed. The elevation of/roundwater bane~th the subject site is estimated al 3-.4 fe~t above mean sea level (msl) according to the 1999 SCDHS water table map. The topof~apbic elevation on site OCT-:.2-26K30 ;.1:27 516 425 1257 P.07/18 Ont¢ ~h~ ~me~mrds ~ ~P&V ~304 r~ges ~m appmxi~ely 10-30 fee~ above ~1, b~d on ~e ~bmittod si~ pl~. ~for~, · e m~ d~ to goundwatet is ~proxi~tely 6-7 fe~; h~ev~, ~e 8ep~ ~ watg ~ the new d~'elopment ~ea of the s~te is ~e~ ~ 20 feet. ~e direction of go~wat~ flow is tow~ds ~e sou~, muth~st. Thc d~th to ~o~dwat~ on site ~ not ~u~ed to have si~ifi~nt ~nsu~n~ on ~e location of septic sy~s on ~e p~el, ~ ~e elevation m ~e ~vel~m~t posen of the prope~ ~es be~ 18' ~d 30' above reel It should be noted that tidal wetlands associated with a tributary of East Creek are located near the southern property boundary. However, as no development will occur within 300 feet of this feature, a NYSDEC Article 25 permit is not expected to be necessary-. SUMMARY In conclusion, approval of thc proposed action would not be expected to signifieently impact the site in terms of soil and water reSOUrCeS, The site does not appear to contain significant environmental features that woul~ limit the expansion of the existing use and addition of a rest~azrant. The proposed project will increase wastewater generation, garbage generation, traffic and water use, and substantially complies with the existing zoning and dimensional requirements. The proposed restaurant does not meet the requixed fi'ont ya.ni setback, although involves -tilization an existing non-conforming structure, This increases the intensity of use near the Main Road fiontage and causes non-conformance with the fi'ont yard setback, and should be considered in terms of the need or lack of need for a variance. With respect to land use, the proposed action wi!l occur along the Main Road frontage, minimi~i.g impacts to adjacent residential developments. The ~roposed action creates a significant expansion of an existing use and increase in development intensity along this portion of Main Road. With regard to traffic generation, it is recommended that the applicant provide vehicular trip generation data for the project based on similar developments in the area. The data should include the anticipated hours of operation and should differentiae betwec~ winery, ~sitor and restattrant trip gen~ation The vehicular trip generation data will enable the Town of Southold to evaluate whether or no~. a traffic impact study will be required. 0CT-'- 2-2080 516 425 1257 P.08/:t8 617.21 Appendix A $~a[e Env~ronm~flt&I Quality Review FULL ENviRONMENTAL ASSESSN~ENT FORM Pu~po.~e~ Th~ f~t~ ~AF ~S d~s:~ne¢ ~o h~p applicants and ~en~[e~ dele;mine, in an ordedy manner, wh~her a p~oiect L D~TE~MJNATION Of SIGNIFICANCE--Type 1 ~nd Unlisted Actions The prOjeCt will nO[ result in any large an~ important impacts) and, therefore, is one which wfl~ not e~f~c[ (or [h~s Unlisted Action because (he mltl~tio~ mensuregdespribed in PART'3 have been te~uir~, on the environmeht. [here¢orc a OO$iti~E'~epJatatlon wilJ,l~{'preo=.f,¢d'- Condldoned Negative Declaration is.only vatid,for Unlisted Actions Faccnic Bay Winery - Nsw Tasting Barn $it~natUl'e of I'¢¢parer [if dil'fL'~Ont from resl~onsible officer) I OCT-Z2-~-~ 11:~8 516 4~$ i25T P.09×~8 Prop,.red by ~rojec~ i~form~dOn you behove will be needed ~ complete Part~ 2 and ~. Pecontc Ba~ ~iner:~ - New Tasting B~rn 3~320,~ain Road~ Cu~ch~, NY ~ber~ Lun~ - RLA Architects (~ c/o Grays=~ne Builders ~82 ~on%a~k H~hwa'~, P0 Box 17~8 . c,~w~c ~ ~ 11932 Bri~gehamp~on., PSD1. Lo~erre - Lavcor. AgricuXtural, Inc. [ '( 212 557-7~00 c~mo ~ NY i0158 New York Construe%iOn of ~ new 10,259 sq. ft. Tasting B~rn with and S%er~ge. Removal of ~he existing 2,459 sq. ft. Tasting Barn with Offices and S~orage. ~emoval of %he existing gravel parking %o~ add COnstruction of a new a~ghal~ p~rking A. 5ire Description Phy. sica[ setsns of overat~ p~o~ec[, both deve[op~ ~nd u~developed a~eas, 1, Pretent land u~e; ~U~ban ~l~du~tria( ~CommerciaJ ~sidential (suburban) ~Forcs~ ~Aericuitur~ , ,~the~ APPROXIMATE A~REA~E PRESENTL~ Me,dew pr 8~ushJand (Non-agHcukur~l} ~cres, A~ricuhural (tr, c~ude~ orchards, crophnd, p;~tu?e e[c,) 23 · 885 ncees 1 - 018 ~cres E)Rura[ (nonJa~ AFTER. COMPLETIOh Land CJassification System~ acres, 4. Am there bedrock Outcroppings on proiee~'~ite~ ~Y~ ~. Wha~ is depth to bed~ockl N,. A. (in Ieee) 2 OCT-i2-2ESC4 ~1:28 516 425 1257 ~V~ ~NO Accopdi~ lo _ OYes ~NO D~cri~e .... ~Yes ~P4o tf yes explaln ~, .- -- 5~ream~ witkin or conti~uOus ~o proi~c~ ar~: ~- ~ · a Nam~~,,.~~'~ ~ '~1 b Dize Un ~cres~ Ii Yes doe~ ~u~flclent,capecJ[y exi~ to allow ¢onnection~ . ~Yes ~'~ Il Yes. wli: improvements be n~cessary ~o allow connection~ ~es the site IoC~[e~ in Bn a~rlcu;~utal d=stric~ ~ordfiod pursuan~ ~b Asricuhure and Marke~ Section ~03 a~d 304~ ~Yef ~NO gn~o~n the ~ite located in o~ ~ubstantlally co~d~uous to a Cdtical ~nviron,nen~l Are~ designated pu'rsuant to Article :he ECL and 6 NYCRR 617~ ~Yes ~o H~S :he site ever bee~ use~ fo'r the disposal o~ solid or haz~¢dous was~f. ~Y~s (_ Project DescriptiOn P'.fl. ysical dimcnsions and sca!e of proiect (fill in dimen.sion$ as opprOlJrlate), ' · ' a. ,Total conti~uoas acreage owned or contrc~lh:d by p~Ject spo6sor '53. 187, acres, b. PrOject acraaKe to bc dcvel0p~: 2'7.031 acres ini6nlly; 53. 187 __ acro~ ulUma:oly c. Project acreage to fern%in un(Icve[oped d, Length of Dro~ect, in miles: ~ ¢. Numbr:r of o~f-stree~ p~tkin~ ~,Oacc¢ e~lsdn~l approx 30; propr)¢ed 9,~' BtalZ~ plus 38 overflow i. Dimensions (in feet) of largest I)fOl~e~ S.tfuCl~e , - 0CT-22-2~0 11:29 516 425 125'7 P.11,/18 8. Will 5~acdng OCCUr d~rin~ con~truc~io~ ~Yes 10. ~umber of. iobs eliminated by ~his pFo~ec[ _ 0 b. Name of wa:er oody in~j which e~Fluenc will be discharsed q3. Is subsurface liau~d w~s.~e dis~osa~ ~nvo ved~ ~Ye~ ~No Type 14. wd[ sure,ce area cf ~n exi~;~n~ ~ater body ~ncrease or decrease by proposa(~ ~Yes q6. Wd) the prolect 8enerate solid wasCe~ ~es ~No paper and o~her ~ecyclables ~. If yes. what is the amount p~ mo~th _ . ~ Ions .~ C. If yes. g,ve name ~ ~.ecO~ ~FF ; Iocatibn _ ~d~.~ e. ,~} Yes, e~p)ain 17. Will (ho Dreiect involve the disposal of solid wast. e? []Yes ENo a. If yes. ~hat is the antioipa(cd rate of di~posal~ ' tons/~o.th. b. If yes. what is the ~nticipnied site life? yes, rs. 18. Will project use herbicides or f)csticldc:s~" If yes , ;ndic~(~ t~e(s) ( insignificant_ ,inere~e~ in~Ro~er ..~n~ ,~.~ ) 24. Does pfosec~ idvolve Local St,,le oc Ct,doral lundinllf ~Yes I't YeL explain 4 516 425 125'7 P.J. 2/lg ' Ildq x~Y~ ~No s~e Plan ~Yes ~No N~, ~Yes QNo HmaZtb Perm., ~ ~Yes QNo ArchitectUral Rewiev ~a~/200 ~s ~NO T~ Tr~s~es, Public Officials 200. ~Yes QNO NYSD0~r NYSDEC ff~i!/2o0 ~Yes ~No Bur~nu ATF ~ C C. Zoning and ?lannimg !nformation 1. ~oes proposed action involve a pJann~rqj or zon[n~ den s;on? ~Ye~ ENo ~Onln~ amendm~n~ ~ZOnin8 varianc~ ~peci~l usc perm~ ~subdivi~ion ~si~e plan 2. V'Vh~ is ~he zonin~ c~assif~cadon(~)o~ ~he site~ B ~d R-BO ~. W~t is/~h~ ma~mu~ potential ~evelcpment oJ the site ;f developed ~s permitted ~y the ~resen~ 4. Wh~: is the ~ro¢¢sed zoning of t~ sL~e? B ~nd ~-80 ~,no ,q~n~e) 7 Wh~ a~e ~he predom,nar~L land u*e sJand zonio~¢{as~ifi~tio0s wi~n a,,~_~Se ra~us of~oo~ed a'~ion~. 10. Will prbpOse~ gCtiO~ require ,~ny authOrizaUo~s) for the formation of~et ~r ~va~et d~tricts? ~Yes 11. Will the proDosed actio~ create a demand ~or any cammuniW pmvidcd..servJces (r~creation, fire ~rotecti~n)~ ~Ye~ ~No a. if yes, is existing capooty ~u~flcient,.to.~ndlc prot~cte~ demand? ~Ye~ ~No · ~2, Will the proposed,actlon result in th~ gener;(ion o~ traffic significantI,y above ~tesent levels? ~Yes a, I~ yes, is the exit[in8 road network ~(lequ~, to ha~<lle t~e ~ddi:ional tr~H[c[ ~Yes ~No Informational Details E. Verifica'tion wilh INit '~, OCT-22-2~E~ !1:30 516 425 125'7 P.13/1@ Geeeral Information (Read C&tef~llyJ · in templet, ins the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my responses an'~ determinations been' reasonebleJ The reviewer ~s not expected t~ be an expert environmental anaiyst. · Identifying that an impact will be polaintieJly large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily xilailicaol. Any large Impact m~st be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. Identifying an impact in oolumn 2 simply asks that it be looked at further. · The Examples provided ate to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold of magnitude that wuuld tdll:er a response in column 2, The examples am &en~ally agplicable thr~i~ut the State for most skua~ons. But, ~r any ~Decific ~miect er site other e~mples and/or lower ~resholds may ~ apptopria~ [or a Poten~al Larle Imaact tei~nse, ~us requirina evaluation In Pan 3. · The impacts ef each amiect, on each site. in ea:h locality, will va~. Therefore, the ~amples am Illus~at~e and have b~n offered al ~uidance. T~y ~o not cons~itu~ an ~&u~ve lit: of Imp~ and th~old~ m answer ~ch qu~n. · The number oJ exampJ~ per question d~z not indicste ~e importance e~ each e In iden[ifyInI impact, consider lena term, short le~m and cumlative a. Answer each of the 1~ questers in PART 2. Answer Ves if ~ere will bt any impact b. Maybe answers should be :onsidered as V~ answer~. c. If answerinj Yes ~a · question ~hen check ~e apptapria~ b~ [column 1 or 2) to indicate lhe ~te~tlal size of the impact If imaact thres~ld equals or exc~ds an~ examCe ~tovid~; check column 2. If Impact will occuJ but threshold is lower than ~am~le, chock c~umn q. d. If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact t~n consider ~e impact u potentially latje and e. I~ a potentially larje ~mpact checked in column 2 can be mltila~d by chanj~) in the project ~ a sm~l Jo moderate impact, al~ check the Yes box in ~olumn 3. A Ne response i~icates that suc~ a reduction is net ~lible. Th~ must be explained in Part 3, IMPA~T ON LAND Wil! the proposed action result In a physical change to the project sltef INO Examples that would apply to column 2 Any cease, etlon on slopes of 15% or 8~ter, (1S foot rise per 1~ foot of ]en~ch), o~ where ~e ~e~t~l s~opes In the project area ~ceed ~0~. COnltruc~on on iand where the depth to the w~er table is less than 3 feet. C~nstruc~on of p~ve~ parking area for 1,~0 or more vehicles, Cons~ruc~on on la~ where b~rock is exposed or lenerallv within 3 feet of ~Istini ground surface. Con~:ruc~on ~at will continue for more than 1 year or ;nvOJve more than one phase or staae. Excavation for mining pu~oses t~t would remove more than m~ af natural ms.rial (i.e.. tuck or soil) per ConstructJ~ or expansion of a samta~ landfill Cons:ructi~ ~n a designated floodway, Other imp~cU ............ 2. Will ~ere be an iffe~ tr...ey umque or unus~l la~ fo~ms f~nd ~ slte~ (Lo., cliffs, dunes, g~lollcal fo~attons, etc.)lNO ~YES Specific land forms: ,, 6 1 2 3 Sm~,li to Potentlel C~n Imp&ct Be Modit~te ~rge Mltlgat~ By Imp~t Impa=t Pml~t ~ange ~. O BYes DNo ~ ~ OYes ONe IMPAC'~I~I WATER (Under Article~ 15, 24, 2S of the Environmental Conservation Law, ECL} BNa ~YES E~am~le~ tMt wo~ld aDplv to column 2 OredainE more than 1~ cubic yards of mamrial from channel of a protec~d stream. tx[eh=ion of ut/lib dis~Hbution fac;lines :hrough a pro~ected water bo~, Construction ~n [ designated f~eshwater or tidal wetland. Other impacts; ...... 4 Wail proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water? IINO OYES Examples that would epl:ly to column 2 · A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water · Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface a~ea, e O~er impacts: 5, Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater Quality or quantity1' nNo ~YES Eaarnale~ [hat would apply to column 2 Pro~osed ^ctlon will requi~e a discharge permit Proposed Action r~uires use of a source of water that does not have approval to serve proposed ~project) action, Proposed Action recu~res water supply from wells w~th ireater th~n 45 gallo~s per minute pumping Co~:raction or o~erado~ c~usin& any co~J~a:Jon of a water s~pply Jvstem. Proposed Action will adverselV ~ffect groundwater. Liguid effluent will ~e ¢onvey~ off [he sJ~ [o facilities which presently do not e~ist or ha~ i~d~uam ca,acid'. Prepaid Action wouid use water in e~cess of 20.~0 gallons per Proposed Action will [ikely cause siltation or other dbchatSe into e~iftini body of wa[er to t~e exten~ that there will be an obvious Contr~t to nl~ural conditions, Proposed Action will reqaire the storage ot petroleum or chemics~ ~ro~u¢~ 8rea~r than 1,100 gallons. Proposed Action will allow re~aj uses in area~ wit~ut water and/or sewer so.ices. Pr~gos~ Action Iocams commercial and/or industrial us~ which may requite ~w o~ expansion of ex/at/al waste treatment andfer storage facilities. Other imaac~: 6 Will proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water runofff BNO []YES Esamples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action would change flood water flows. Impact O 0 O [] 0 [] [] [] [] [] [] O · 0 P. 14/1~ Pote-mJal Can Impact Be Large Mitigated By Impact PrOjaOt ~ange 0 OYes 0 Oyes ONo OYes ~Yes ~ OYes ~ OYes ONo ~ ~Yes ONe 0 OY~ O~o O OY~ OY~ Proposed Action may cause substantial erosion, Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns. Pr~osed Action will allow development in a dasienated floodway. Other imDa¢O: · IMPACT ON AIR 7. Will ;ropose¢ action affect air quality? teNO OYES ' E~amples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action wilJ induce 1,~ or more vehicle tHps in any given · " hour~ , Pm~osed AcLibn will resul: In the incineration of more than 1 ton of refuse aer · Em~slon rate of to~l contaminants wilt exceed heat ~ource ~ucl~ more tha~ 10 million BTU's p~r h~. e Pm~sed aCtiOn will allow an increa~ h~ the amount of land co~mitt~ t= Industrial use. · Pm~ed action will allow an increase in ~e density of industrial development wi~in ex~tin8 industrial ~reas. .. · O~er impact: IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 8. Will Propose¢/Action affect any threatened or endangered species~ ~IINo r-lyES E~amlales that would apply to colum, 2 · Reduction of one or more special listed on the New York or Federal Ii*t, ulina the aite. over ur near site or found on the site. · Removal of any portion of & critical or sillnificant wildlife h~bltat. · A~plication of p~ticlde or herbicide more than twice a year, other than for aliricultural I~rposes. · Othe~ impacts: 9, Will Proposed Action substantially affect r. on-:hreatened or ,on-endanlemd species~ IINO r'lYE5 E~ple~ that would aaa~y to column 2 · Pmpo~d Action would ~ubl~antiaHy inter'ere with any m~i~ent or mieram~ fish, ~hellfish or wildlife s~ecies. , Proposed Action requires t~ ~moval of more ~an 10 acres of maim forest (o~r ~ yea5 of age) o~ other locally imaortan: vegetation. IMPA~ ON AGRICULTU~L ~ND RESOURC~ q0. Will the Proposed Action ~ffe~ agricultural la,d rosettes? ~NO ~YES iumplu that would apply to column 2 · The proposed action would sever, cass or limit access m airicukural land [includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.) .' 8 Grnatl~ Impact [] [] [] [] [] [] m [] [] 516 425 1257 P. 15/18 Potential' Can Impaot B~ Large Mltlg~te¢ .By Impact Project Change O DY-, mr~o [] F'] y,.= ONo ["] r-lyes [] OYes E]No I-1 i~yes ~lNo [] r'lyes r-INo C I'lyes nNa [] C]Yes I-INo [] ~Yes [] i-lYes r-INo n nye$ I-INo [] I-~yea UNo 0 r"lye~ UNo [] OYe, r'lNo D DY~ i-INo [] OYes ONo 0CT-~2-2080 516 425 ~25'7 P.16/18 · Cons:ruction activity would excavate or compact the son profile of agricultural land. · The ~ro~osed action wo~ld irreversibly convet~ ~ore than ~0 acres of aBriculturml land or, ~f located in an Agricultural Dls:tict, more · The ~roposed action would disrupt or prevent installaUon of agricultural land m~nagement systems (e,g., subsurface drain lines, outlet ditchel, strip crocgingJ; or crt&to a need for such measures (e,g. cause a farm field ~o drain ¢oorl~ due to increased runoff) - Other Impact: IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RE$OURCE~ 11. Will groposed action affect aesthetic resources~ ~NO ~YES " (1~ neceflary, use the Visual EAF A~dendum i~ Section 617,2q, Ap~n~ix E~mples ~t waul~ a~ply to column 2 · Proa~ed land uses, ~r pro~ect ¢omponent~ obvioully different fr~m or in shana contrut to cut.n: surrounding :a~ use pa~, whether · Ptopos~ I~nd uses, or pro~ect componenU v~ible to u~rs ct aesthetic resources which wiU eliminate or sianiflcantly reduce their enj~ment of the ~esthetic quallu~ of that resou~e. · Project components that will result in the elimination or lignificant ~creening of ~cen~c v~ewl known ~ be im~o~ant to the area. · Other impacts: IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 12, Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic, pre. historic or paleontological importance? ONO I-lYES Eumpies ~hat would apply m column 2 Pro.and Action eccu~rine wholly or partially within er substantially contiguous to any [a¢ili~ or ~i~ Jilted on the State or Nati~ai of his[eric pl~ces Any impact to an archaeoloaical site or fossil bed located within the project P~opo~d Action waft oCCur in an area desi&nated as sensitive for archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inventory. Other impacts: IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 13. Wfl] Proposed Action affect the quantity or ;uality of existing or fubare open spaces er recreational Opportunities? Examples that would a;)ply to column 2 INO mYES · The permanent foreclosure of e future recreational opportunity. · A major reduction of an open space important tO the community. · Other Impacts: 1 '2' ' 3 Sinai Potential Can Irnpact Be Metier&to Large Mttlg&tKI By Impact Impagt Project Change ~ [] ~lYes I"INo ~ ~ OYes 0 Dyes ONo B 0 DYes DNo 0CT-~.2-2~0 ~ L: 32 IMPACT ON '~qSPORTATION 14 Will there be an effect ta existing tra, nspottation sy~tems~' ~sampl~ that wautd apply to column 2 Alteration of present patterns of movement o~ ~ple Ptopos~ Action will result in major traffic problems. Other impact:: IMPACT ON ENERGY 15, Will proposed action affect The community's Sources ut fuel or energy supply? INO C]YES Ezamples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed ACtion wiU cause a greater than 5% increase in the use of any form of energy in the municipality. * Progosed Action will require the creation or e~tension of an energy transmission or supply system to serve more t. han 50 single or two family residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use. ,~ Other impacts: ,. NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS *~6, Wilt there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibration as a result of the Proposed Action! IINO ayES Eaample~ that would apply to column 2 Blasting within %500 feet of a hospi:al, school or oth~ sensitive facility, Odors wilJ occur rou~nelv ~more than one hour per day). Proposed Action will produce o~ratini noise ex~ding ~e t~ai ambient not~ I~els for noise ou~ide of structure. Proposed Action will remove naturaJ barriers that would act as a IMPACT ON PUBL]C HEALTH '~7. Wtll Propnsed Action affect public health and safety? IINO, C]YES Example~ that would apply to column 2 · Pruposed Action may cause a ri;k of e~plos~on o~ m~e~e of s~bl~ancet ILo. oil, p~ticldes, ch~i~als, radiation, etc.] in ~e ev~t acceder ut upset conditions, o~ there may be a chronic Iow ~lscharge or emission, · Pre~sed Action may result in :~e burial of "hazar~o~ wastes" in any form (i,e. t~ic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioa~ve, irri~tin~. inf~tlous, · Storage facilities for one million or more gallons o[ ltquifl~ natural ~as or ¢~her ~mm~ble llquid~. · Pro~s~ action ~ay result In the excavation or o~er disturbance wi~in 2,~ feet of a site us~ far the disposal o~ ~lid er haza~ous wMte. · O~er impacts: 10 Moderate Impact [] [] [] 0 516 425 1257 P.17/18 Potential Can imp. act Be Large Mltlgateci ay ' Impact Prolog4 ¢~ange Yes OYes ONo OY. ONe ONo 0 ONe ~Y~ 0 OCT-12-2BCJO i 1: IMPACT ON GROUND CHARACTER * * OF COMMUNITY OIlI"NEIGHBORHOOD '18. w;iJ proposed ~ction affect the character of the existing community? Ex~mpl~ th~Z wouJ~ mpply ~o ~o',umn 2 The ~fmanent ~opu[a~on of ;he city, tow~ or viii;aa i~ which proiect i~ [ocs=ed is likely to ~row by mere than The muni;i~I budget for ~pltaI expendi~re; or operatin~ wiU increase by more than 5% per year as a result of [his project. Propos~ ~c:lon wiU co,filet wi~h officially adopted plans or Proposa~ action will cau~ a chan~e in the density of [~nd use. Propoled Action will replace or eliminate existing fscilities, Jtruccures or ~reM of historic impotence to the community. ~evelopment wed create a demand for eddltionaJ communiW services (e.~ ~choeis, police and fire, etc.) Proposed Ac[Jo~ wl(l se: an important precedent for future projects, Proposed Action ~JJl create ~r eliminate employment. Olher Moderate Impact [] · r'q · 516 42.5 12D7 P.18/18 Potential Can Impact Be Large Mltlgatec~ By Im~a~t Project Change ~Yes ~No ~ Yes ~ No ~Ye~ ~Yel ~No ~Yes ~es D~es BNo ~Yes ~No 19. Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to potential adverse environmental imcacts~ ~'NO r~YES It Any Action In Part 2 I$ Identified aa a Potential Large Impact or if You Cannot Determine the Magnitude cf Impact, Proceed to Part Part 3--EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS Responsibility of Lead Agency Part 3 mu~t be prepared if o~e or more Impact(s} is considered to be potentially large, even ;f the impact(s) may be mitisated. ]~structlooJ Discuss the following for each impact identified in Column 2 of Part 2: 1. Briefly describe the impact 2, D~scribe[if applicabJeJ how the impact coutd be mit;gated or reduced to a small to moderate impact by project change(s). 3. 8used on the information available, decide if it is reasonable to conclude that this impact is important. To answer the question of Importance, consider: · The probability of the impact occurring · The duration of :he intact · Its irrevetsibility, including permanently lost resources of value e Whether the imcact can ar will be controlled · The regional consequence of the impact · Its potential dlveri~ence from local needs and goals · Whether known objections to the proiect relate to this impact. (Cootinue on attachments} 11 TOTi~ P, 18 NOU-28-28~O 516 425 12~ P.02/18 ~ Psr~ ! Revl~v NP&V ~0304 ENVIRONMEN'IAL ASSE,~MENT RI!VIeW ]~NVIRONMENTAL AND PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS PI~CONiC BAY VINEYARDS {~ PI:CONIC Prepar< by: Rob~.t Kassner Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Msin Road Soulhold, New York 1197 Nelson, Pope & Voorhis, LLC $72 Walt Whi~tum Road M~Iville, New York 11747 Date: October 10, 2000 The Town of $outhold Planning Board h~ tetainod Nelson, Pope & VoorMs, LLC ~&~ for en~m~ental ~d pl~ing ~mul~g ~mces in r~i~ of ~e above ref~c~ ~te pl~ ~plicafion, A~ c~ently pm~s~, ~c app~eafion involves ~ ~moval of ~ c~n$ t~fing b~ to allow fm the ~ction of a new w~ ~ting b~, the conv~sion of ~ ~is~g f~ouse ~o a rest!~L~t (Pha~ H; subject of ~ sro pl~ ~t), mco~on ~d ~p~sion of a ~avel ~ss ~v~gk~g m8a to a paved ~. Two nsw s~t~ leac~ fiel~ wi~ ~so be ~t~lzd ~ a re~t of th~ pmpo~ Undg ~xist~g come,ons, ~ m~ofi~ of ~ si~ casistl of a vineygd, ~ a t~ting b~, g~a8e, shed, b~, f~ouse, f~ st~fl ~d ~:U production b~Idin8 1~ flong gtz'~ ~nt~e on M~n Road. ~ doc~t ~yze~ the sit~ ~d ar~ mso~ incl~g topogaphy, soils, waler, ~d use, zon~g ~ tr~s~aion ~d o~ av~abl~ i~a~o~. ~ si~ ~ ~so b~ ~pec~ for ~~1~ com~, In addifi~, E~ P~ I ~ubmi~ed ~ the apphcaion Ms ~ co~ect~ ~d is a~ched ~n, Location and $it¢ O'¢er~iew The project site is located on the south side of Main Road (NYS Rte 25), approximately 120 feet east of Stillwater Avenue in Peconlc, Town of Southold, Cotmty of Suffolk. Thc subject property can be more particularly described az $CTM number I000-I03~01- 19.2 and 19.1 ! (which were merged in June of 2000). The property haz approximately 727.23' of road frontage along Mare Road, and approximately 200' of road frontage on Stillwater Avenue. The majority of the site comists of a vineyaxl, and contai.~ a winery tasting barn, a farmho~,~, barn, garage, shed, farm st<d, and a win~ry production building near the site's frontage on Main Road. The NOL.~-28-21~Et 25:07 5~.6 425 '~25'7 I::'. 83/&B f~onJc w~fl~ a~ locat~ adj~ent to ~ sou~ posen of the pr~ b~ond ~c ~is~g v~d propeay w~& will not b~ alt~ ~ a r~ult of ~s pmj~t. T~s ~vi~ will ~g~ proposed p~jcct ad Rs pogmi~ ~act tm ~e l~d rose.ecs. As currently proposed, the application involves the removal of an existing tastLng barn to allow for the construction cf a new winery tasting barn, the conversion of an existing farmhouse to a t,:staurant, ara the removal of ~e existing sravet access drive/parking area to allow fiat the rceonfiguration and expansion of a paved access drive and parl6ng area. The proposed action will also require the irmallatitm of two now sanitary systems. Thc project will be phased in two sections as follows: Phase I consists of thc rmaoval of the existing 2,500 s.f. tasting barn and the construction of a 10,259 s.f. tasting barn, which will consist of office and storage areas, as well as mail beverage distributioa. It should he noted that the building area for thc proposed tasting barn is variously reported as 13,712 s.f. (Sheet 1) and 14,765 s.f. (Sheet 3) on the proposed site plan; it is recommended that ~c building area be correctly idorltifiefl throughout the proposed plans. Currently, thc existing tasting Imm tins a separate access and associated gravel parking area from thc remainder of thc site. This access will be removed as part of thc proposed project, with all traffic directed toward the main site access near the existing dwcHing/pruposed restaurant. The total parking provided tm site will be expanded from approximately 30 stalls to ~ parking stalls, with aR additional 38 overflow spaces provided. A total of 107 stalls is required by code. The proposed parking areas and access chuve will be paved, as compared to the gravel found under existing comtitiom. Phase II consists of the conversion &the existing farmhouse into a 46 seat (1,300 s.f.) restaurant. Each proposed structure will he two (2) stories in height. The existing winery production building, si,ed, garaSe, barn, enid farm stand will remain following development. The proposed action will involve devetopmant only within the General Business (B) zoned portion of the site, or the 5.684 acres wiOl froBtage on Main Road. The proposed building area totals 17,918 s.f, or 7.2% lot coverage within the General Business (B) zoned portion of the site (when utilizing a building area of 10,259 s.f. for the proposed tasting barn). According to the site plan. approximately 68% of thc development area (General Business DisMal) will be landscaped. Land Use and Zoning TI~ project stte is located in an area that is dominated by commercial, residential, and agricultural uses. Utilities, a cemetery and limited undeveloped vacant land also exists in the immediate viciaity. The proposed application is somewhat consistent with aurrounding uses and ~c existing site use, however the action involves a significant expansion (24%) of an existing ~se, as well as a increase in the intensity of use on site. The majority of thc site consists of a cultivated vineyard, whJ. eh will remam following development. 5!.6 425 125'7 P.04/;18 Approximately 5.684 acres of the site fi:ontln~ on Main Road is zoned General Business (B), with the remaining 21.347 acres zoned Low-Densily Residential (R-80). Developra.,~tt in the R- 80 zoning district requires a minimum lot size of 80,000 SF, or just slightly less than 2 acres, with a maximum pennitted lot covarage of 20% of the lot area. The minimum lot size in the Gerl~ral Btaincts (B) district is 30,000 s.f., with an allowable lot coverage of 30%. Building height is limited to 35 feet and 35% of the property is r~quired to be ]and~caped. Dimensional setbacks are as follows: Front yard 150 e-.et, side yard 25 feet (both, 50 feet), and rear yard 35 feet. As previously stated, the proposed action i~'olves development only within :he Oeneral Business (B) zoned portion oft.he property. Additional requirements as set forth in the Town code regarding winery operahous include the following: that thc winery is licensed under NY$ law from which wine made from primarily Long Island grapes is produced and sold; that retail sales exist on site; end that site plan approval be obtains. No additional "bulk" requkements for these types of structures are specified in thc Code. Therefore, the proposed application is consistent with the dimensional zoninll require~ments within the General Business (B) zomng district and no variances appear necessary. However, it should be noted that the existing dwelling maintains a 52 foot front yard setback and · does not meet the setback r~quiremcnt as specified by code; thc conversion ofti~ structure into a restaurant increases the intensity of use closer to the site frontage than would typically be allowed. This change to a more intense use which causes non-conformance with the front yard setback; this should be considered in terms of the need for a variance, The surrounding areas co,utain a mix of zoning classifications. Typically, the properties which front on Main Road in the immediate vicinity of the site are zoned B Business, with an LB zoned parcel and an RO zonod parcel located to the east. end an RO zonccl property and HB zoned properties t~ the west. The southern poriion of th,' site is zoned R-80, as are the pmp~ties to the east. R-40 zoning is dominant to the south, w~st, and farther southeast along East CreW. I-IB Business is dominant along Main Road west of the site, Land use in the general area is predominantly ~ommercial, residential and agricultural, and appears to reflect current zoning regulations. A lighting plan and lighting clctaib arc provided. Lighting appears to be directed inward into the property with accent lighting in appropriate locations. Illumination diagrams re not provided; however, the applicant should enstae that illumination does not extend beyond property lin~s and hours of lighting arc minimized to that which is necessa'y to maintain safety and access. In summary, with respect to land use, ae proposed project is sim/lar to the commercial uses that front on Main .Road, end a winery/restawant is an allowable usc within thc Gencral Business (B) zoning district, Howcvcr, thc proposed action involves a 24% expansion of an existing usc, and the proposed restaurant also incrcascs thc intensity of use on the site, which may create cumulative impacts along this portion of Main Road. The proposal restaurant does not meet the front yard setback requirements, although the structure is non-conforming under existing conditions. Minimal impacts would be expected to the surrounding residential uses as the proposed development will occur along the Main Road frontage. NO~C-~28--288e ~.5". 8.9 5J.6 425:1257 P.05/18 Bay Vineyarth ~ Pecenie FAF Part I Review NP&V #B0304 TI~fl~c C~, ,nerauon The proposed addition to the existing vineyard is significant and will necessitate, aocording to the zoning eode~, the construction of at l~ast 107 parking ~paces. Th/s r~p~sents a thr~e fold increase in on-site pa~k/ng. Thc applicant should provide veh/cul~ trip generation informatio~ for the proposed uses of the site based upon observations at similar types oFland use in the Tow~ of Southold. The vehicular mp generation data should be categorized to differentiate between winery, risker, and restaurant trips. The data should include the anticipated hour of operation ar~ other pertinent information. The vehicular trip generation data will enable the Tow~ of Southold to evaluate whether or not a traffic impact study will be required. Luformalion with regiral ko the nurober and size of the troclcs should be presented, in addition to delivery time frames, Soils and To~o~ranhv The majority of the site is relatively fiat, with the existing slopes between approximately 0-I0%. However. there are relatively steep slopes in the southwestern coroer of the property adjacent to Stillwater Avenue. This atea rises in ¢levatiun from t0' to 22' above mean sea level (mil), as indicated on the site plan. Additionally, a maail drainage swale is located in the southern portion o£ thc site, leading to a drainage culvc~, on the north side o£ the private roadway £ormlng the southern property bounda~, of the site. The majority of the site lies at an elevation of be~een approximately 18' to 30' above msl. The pwpea~y does not contain any additional significant landforms or geological features. The Suffolk County Soil Survey (Warner, 19q$) identifies several soil types on the subject site, which consist of the following: Haven loam, 0 to 2% slopes (HaA), Haven loam, 2 to 6% slopes (HaB), Riverhead sandy Ioam, ~ tn 8% slopes (RdB), and Carver and Pl~maouth sands, 8 to 15% slopes (CpE). Those areas proposed for developmer~ will occur on HaA ami HaB soils. The Haven Loam series is described within the Suffolk County Soil Survey as land which is suitable for development, with good le,~hing potential. The hazard of erosion hazard is slighi on HaA soils, with moderate to slight erosion hazards on Hall soils. The Riverhead series consists &deep, well-drained muderately coarse textures soils that formed a mantle of sandy loam or fine sand3, loam over thick layers of coarse sand and gravel (Warner, 1975). The soil survey lists the erosion hazard for RdB is moderate to slight and the main concerns of rmmagement are controlling nmoff and erosion an,t provi(ling adequate moisture for landscaping/agriculture. The Carver series consists of deep, excessively drained, coarse-textured soils. The hazard o£ erosion is moderate to severe on the CpE soils, which ate droughty, and fertility is low. Moderately steep to steep slopes are e limitation to use. The soil survey also depicts an "unclassified intermittem stream" and two "wet spots" located m the southern portion of the property. The intermillent stream is associated with the small drainage swale mentioned above. The topography and soils within the proposed development area do not appear to pres~n~ severe development constraints for the proposed project. Water Re~om'¢~ Public water is supplied to the general area by the Suffolk County Watar Authority', although thc sit= ks=If is not specifically connected to public water. The nearest water main is 16" in diameter and begins on Main Road east of thc site, just wcsl of Bridge Lane. Thc water nmin extends northeastward along Ma~n Road. The nearest wellfield is the Mill Lane Well Field & Pump Sta~on, located on ~e noghwest comer of Middle Road (CR 48) and Mill Lane infraction. It is ~p~;ted ~t the site is rurrently connoted to on-site wells for irrigation and water comumption. The site plan indicates that the new wino tasting building will utilim a n~w privat~ well for water supply. Smithy disposal ~ithin the proposed project is ~xpec~ed to ~ m~g~ by ~nvenfion~ on-sim ~tiz t~-l,a$~Jag pool syat,~. In 1978, ~e Lo~ I~I~ R,~onal Pl~ng Bo~ ~e Long ~d ~mpr~ive Wasle Tr~em M~ag~t P~ (208 S~y). ~c 208 Sm~y identified eight (8) hy~rogeclo~c zon~ ~ N~u md S~ Co~ti~. ~;se ~n~ w;ro ~stin~uish~ b~ed ~pon diff;r~ccs ~ ~derl~g ~undw~er flow pa~s ~d wa~ qualiW. ~e ~bj~t site is locat~ ~in SCDHS O~undwat~ M~g~t Zone W, which ~co~mg to ~icle VI of the Suffo~ Co~W S~ Code, ~ m a[low~le flow of 600 gallons per ~y (~d) per ~re in ~ sewed by pubic wa~. Therefore, ~e fllow~le ~og~ bemng flow tbr ~e 27.031 acre site is 16,219 ~. ~e s~, desi~ flow is comput~ ~ing SCDHS manual Standar~ flar,~proval of Pla~ and Consr~ction for &wag~ Dlsp~al 8y~tzms for Other ~an Single Famit2 Residues. ~ indicated on ~c sim pl~, the desi~ flows est~!is~d as/~llows: Structur-'s Existing ~arm Stand · Storage Existing Winery Building Propo.md Restauram ' Prol~osed Tasting Bar~ Offices Storage f l~ail B~vcrag= Dist. WATER:USE ;Area ]12 s.f, 2,238 s.£ 2,090 ~,£. 46 seats 940 6,825 s.f, Multipll~r ....~ater Generation 0.05 ~ I 15.6 gpd 0.04 ~ I 93.52 gpd 0:04 glxi j 83:6 ~d 1~ ~scm ~ 1.380 ~d .- o~ 2 I~2 12 ~d 7,000 S.f, TOTAL --- It should be noted that the square footage for thc proposed tasting barn utilized in calculations above totals 14,765 s.i;, or 4.506 s.f. grcatcr than stated on Shcet 1 of thc sitc plan. Based on these calculations, the proposed winery operation would cmffonn with Aniclc VI of the Suffolk Count>' Sanitary Code and would not be expected to adYe~sely affect groundwate~ quality provided properly functioning systems are designed and installed, The elevation of groundwater beneath the subject site is estimated at 3-4 f~t above mean sea level (msl) according to the 1999 SCDHS water tabl,~ map. The topographic elevation on site NOt'-28-2¢-:,¢.~8 ;5;~29 5i6 425 125'? r~ge~ fi~m ~proximat~!y 10-~0 t~t ~ove msl, b~ on ~e submitted fit~ pl~. ~efo~, Ee minim~ d~th ~ ~omndwat~ is agp~at¢ly ~7 f~et; however, the ~ to wa~r in ~e new development ~a of tl~ site i~ ~ater th~ 20 feet. The ~r~fion of ~omdwam flow tow~ the ~oum, ~outhe~t. The dep~ ~ ~o~dwat~r on ,itc i~ not ~xp~ lo ~w Mg~fic~t constaints on thc tocaaoa of s~dc systems on ~e p~ceL ~ th~ ~l~vation in devdo~ment ~aion of me prope~ lies be~'~ 13' ~d 30' above real It should be noted that tidal wetlands associated with a tributary of East Creek are located near the southern pmp,,rty boundary. However, as no development will occur within 700 feet of this feature, a ,NrYSDEC Article 25 peuni~ is not expected to be necessary. .~MMARy In conclusion, a~proval of the proposed action would not he expacterl tc significantly impact the site in terms of soft and water resources. The site does not appear to contain significant environmental features that would limit the expansion of the ~xisting us, and acktition of a l'estanl'allt. The prolx~s~fl projact will increase wastewater generation, garbage generation, traffic and water use, and substantially complies with the ~dsting zoning and dimensional requirements, Th* proposed rcstam-'m~t does not meet th~ reqnired fi'ont yard setback, althou~Ja involves utilization an existm§ non-conforming structure. This in~rcasc~ thc intensity of usc near lhe Main Road frontage and causes non-conformance with the front yard setback, and should be consid~-ed ir: t~ms of the nell or la~k ofn~d for a variance. With respect t~ land use, the propos~ action will occur alert8 th~ Main l~ad fronlase, minimizin8 impacts to adjacent residential developments. The proposcxi a~tion creates a significan! expamion of an existing use and increase in development intensity along this potion of Main Road. With r~garfl lo lraffic generation, it is recommended that the applicant pray/de vehicalar ~p g~eration data/'or the project based on similar developments in the area. The data should include the amicipat~xi hour~ of operation and should differentiate between winery, visitor and restaurant trip 8eneration. The vebicoJar ~p 8meration dala will enable Ihe Town of Sou',hold to ~valuate wh~ihcr or not a traffic impaot s~dy will be require, CRAIG SIRACUSA, P.E. REGIONAL DIRECTOR STATE Of NEW York DEPARTMENT OF TrANSPOrTATION VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGhWaY hauppaugE, N.Y. 1 1788 DEC 2ooo JOSEPH H. BOARDMAN COMMISSIONER December 26, 2000 Mr. Robert Lund Robert Lund Associates 4829 East Lake Harriet Parkway Minneapolis, Mn. 55409 Dear Mr. Wolpert: Your September 8, 2000 Submission Peconic Bay Winery Route 25, Cutchogue Our Case No. 00-233P This is in regard to the site plans for the above noted project which were re-submitted to us for review. The.revised plans are acceptable with the exception of the Maintenance and Protection of Traffic scheme. The reduced speed and flagman signs are to be removed from the detail shown on the plan. Please resubmit three copies of a revised plan addressing our comment. Prior to issuing a Highway Work Permit, you must submit the required permit fee and Surety Bond (sample enclosed). It is also mandatory that the protective liability insurance be provided by the permitted. This must be accomplished by either submitting a completed Perml7q, Certificate of Insurance, in accordance with Option A (form enclosed), or by submitting the fee specified below to be covered under the NYSDOT Blanket Policy. Complete the enclosed Highway Work Permit Application and return with above. In recent years, many states have employed access management as a major technique to address conflicts between through traffic and that generated by developments. The goals of access management are limited to the number of access points, separate conflicts points and remove turning traffic from through movements. New York State is utilizing this technique to minimize impacts to State highways. We recommend, therefore, that cross access to this site be obtained from adjacent properties. If this not possible, it should be shown on plans for implementation as part of future redevelopment. Mr. Robert Lund December 26, 2000 Page 2 This permit application should also be sensitive to the unique visual and historic settings of the Long Island North Shore Heritage Area, which runs from the Queens/Nassau County Line to Orient Point and from Route 25 or 1-495, whichever is father south, north to the Long Island Sound. All checks issued to the State of New York must show a Federal Identification Number. Highway Work Permit: Permit Fee (Payable to "State of New York"): $ 550.00 Bond Amount: $15,000.00 Insurance Fee: $175.00 Question concerning this case shall be directed to Mr. Vito Lena at 952-6020. All re-submittals must be reference to our case number and the County tax number. Very truly yours, Original Signed By A.W. BACHNER A.W. BACHNER, P.E. Civil Engineer III Traffic Engineering and Safety cc: Ms. Valorie Scopaz, Town of Southol~-'''''~'~'------'--''--' Mr. Raymond Jacobs, Town of Southold AWB:VFL:JS JEAN W. COCHRAN SUPERVISOR TOWN HALL - 53095 MAIN ROAD Fax. (516)- 765 - 1366 JAMES A. RICHTER, R~.A. ENGINEER TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971 TEL(516)-765-1560 OFFICE OF THE ENGINEER TOWN OF SOUTHOLD December 18, 2000 Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman - Planning Board Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Peconic Bay Winery Main Road, Cutchogue, N.Y. SCTM #: 1000 - 103-01 - [19.2 & 19.11] Dear Mr. Orlowski: DEC 19 2000 Southold Town Planning Board As per your request, I have reviewed the site plan for the above referenced Project. The drainage calculations were provided on sheet C-1. The drainage design, as proposed, meets the minimum requirements of the Town Code. If you have any questions concerning this report, please contact my office. .mes A. Richter, R.A. PLANNING BOARD blEMB~S BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIA2qO Town Hail, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 December 19, 2000 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Robert Lurid, PLA Architects C/o G-raystone 2282 Montauk Highway Bridgehamton, NY 11932 Peconic Bay Winery Main Road, Cutchogue SCTM# 1000-103-19.1 & 19.2 Dear Mr. Lund, The enclosed report has been received from the Towns Environmental Consultant. We are sending you a copy for your information. As discussed at our recent meeting, and as mentioned in the Zoning Board's variance, the trees must be cleared fron~ the front entrance. Revised plans must be submitted to the Planning Board. The Architectural Review Committee's recommendation had been previously sent to you for compliance. I believe they require further details as contained in the report. As requested in the consultants report, please submit the trip generation data to this Board. In addition to the above, review is required by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services and The New York State Department of Transportation. If you have any questions, please contact this office. · el offed Cat. Kassner Site Plan Reviewer Ends. PLANNING BOARD MEMB]~ BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: FROM: RE: DATE: Jamie Richter, Town Engineer Robert G. Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer/~ Peconic Bay Winery Main Road, Cutchogue SCTM# 1000-103-1-19.11 & 19.2 ~2000 Please review the above project for drainage. APP',ALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard E Goehringer, Chairman James Dinizio, Jr. Lydia A. Tortora Lora S. Collins George Homing BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Southold Town Hall~ 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 Telephone (631) 765-1809 DEC 19 2000 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF DECEMBER 7, 2000 $outhold Town Planning Board Appl. No. 4882 - LAV-COR AGRICULTURAL, INC. STREET & LOCALITY: 31320 Main Road, Cutchogue 1000-103-1-19.1 and 19.2 DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: December 7, 2000 FINDINGS OF FACT PROPERTY FACTS: Applicant's property comprises 27 acres on the south side of Main Road in Cutchogue with 565 feet of road frontage. It is largely planted in grapes. Existing buildings, all near Main Road, ara a farmstand, farmhouse, garages and several barns including one used for wine making and one used as a tasting room. The property is zoned Business for a depth of 300 feet from Main Road, and otherwise R-80. BASIS OF APPEAL: Building Inspector's Notice of Disapproval, dated September 20, 2000, denying a permit to construct a new tasting-storage-office building because the building would be 203 feet wide. Code section 100-103C provides that in the Business zone, "no single structure shall have more than sixty linear feet of frontage on one street." AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: Applicant requests a vadance authorizing the dimensions of a 203-foot-wide building as proposed in the construction plans submitted with the building permit application. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION, DESCRIBED BELOW: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspection, the Board makes the following findings: (1) The proposed building will raplace the existing tasting barn and will add storage and shipping araas that applicant states are very badly needed. The proposed facade has several visually distinct segments, raflecting the different activities within. The architect's stated intent is to create the impression of a cluster of differant buildings. Applicant states that having a single building for the differant activities will enhance efficiency and raduce lot coverage and the amount of roadway needed on the property. Alternate sitings for the building, to obviate the need for a variance, would raquira destruction of significant amounts of mature grapevines. (2) The proposed building will be more than 200 feet from the road and will be screened by traes. The addition of the building should upgrade the visual environment of the neighborhood, which is dominated by substantial commercial uses on the south Page 2 - December 7, Appl. No. 4882 - Lav-Cor Agricultural, Inc. Southold Town Board of Appeals side of Main Road. The building, while large, is not monolithic, its size is consistent with other wineries in Southold Town, and reflects the nature of the winery use. The proposed traffic plan should reduce road congestion by moving the winery entrance, now located directly across from a shopping canter entrance, well to the east. For these reasons, grant of the requested vadance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties. (3) There is no evidence that grant of the requested variance will have an adverse effect or impact on physical or environmental conditions. (4) Grant of the requested vadanca is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable applicant to implement its expansion plan while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RESOLUTION/ACTION: On motion by Member Collins, seconded by Chairman Goehringer, it was RESOLVED, to GRANT the requested variance, authorizing construction of the proposed building as described in the application made to this Board, including screening as recommended by the Planning Board, subject to the CONDITION that there no be obstruction to vision at the entrance and exits to the property, and screening shall not exceed a height of 2-1/2 feet above the average street level within an isosceles tdangle having three-foot sides along each street to preserve sight lines for traffic. VOTE OF THE BOARD: AYES: Members (Chairman) Goehringer, Tortora, Collins, and Homing. (Member Dinizio was absent.) This Resolution was duly adopted (4-0). PLANNING BOARD MEMBE~ BENNETT ORLOWSK1, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: FROM: RE: DATE: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, Board of Appeals Bennett Orlowski, Chalrm~ Appl. No. 4882 - LAV-COR AGRICULTURAL INC. (Peconic Bay Winery) Appl. No. 4864 - Martin Rosen November 14, 2000 Appl. No. 4882 The Planning Board is in favor of the requested width variance. The original intent of limiting the building width to 60' was to prevent multiple use buildings such as strip malls in business zoned areas. The purpose of the limitation was to break up the mass &the multiple use buildings. Single occupancy wineries, by their nature, require all operations to be under one roof. Several wineries, located in residential areas near the applicant, exceed the 60' limit. Appl. No. 4864 - Martin Rosen The Planning Board is not in favor of reversing the Building Department's Revocation of Permit. The Code is clear when it states, "that an accessory use cannot exist without a principle use." STATE OF NEW YOrK DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY Hauppauge, N.Y. 1 1788 CRAIG SIRACUSA, REGIONAL DIRECTOR October 10, 2000 JOSEPh H. BOARDMAN COMMISSIONER Mr. Robert Lund Robert Lund Associates Architects, Ltd. 4829 East Lake Harder Parkway Minneapolis, Mn. 55409 Dear Mr. Lund: Your September 20, 2000 Re-Submission Peconic Bay Winery Route 25, Cutchogue Our Case No. 00-233P This concerns the site plans for the above noted project which were submitted to us for review. Prior to the issuance of a Highway Work Permit, we require that he following items be addressed and three copies of a revised site plan be resubmitted to this office. Show Maintenance and Protection of Traffic Scheme (enclosed) for shoulder closing and lane shift on revised plans. Question concerning this case shall be directed to Mr. Vito Lena at 952-6020. All future correspondence shall be directed to him at the above noted address. Very truly yours, A.W. BACHNER,P.E.' Civil Engineer III Traffic Engineering and Safety Attachment CC.' Mr. Raymond Jacobs, Town of Southold Ms. Valerie Scopaz, Town of Southol~ Southold Town Planning Board AWB:VFL:JS PLANNING, BOARD MEMBEO BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Fax (631) 765-3136 Telephone (631) 765-1938 September 28, 2000 Nelson Pope & Voorhis 572 Wait Whitman Road Melville, NY 2188 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Peconic Bay Winery Main Road, Cutchogue SCTM# 1000-103-1-19.11 & 19.2 Dear Mr. Voorhis, The Planning Board refers the EAF for the above project for review. As agreed, the fee will cover a field inspection and preliminary comments on traffic impacts, if any. The $500 review fee has been submitted by the applicant. A purchase order will be sent to you under separate cover. If there are any questions, please contact this office. rel ~,JR~c~rt (l. Kassner Site Plan Reviewer Subutission Without a Cover Letter SCTM#: 10 Comments: SEP 2 8 zmm Southold Town Planning Board PLANNING BOARD MEMBEI~ BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Fax (631) 765-3136 Telephone (631) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 21,2000 Robert Lund, RLA Architects C/o Graystone P.O. Box 1768 2282 Montauk Highway Bridgehampton, NY 11932 Re: Peconic Bay Winery 103-1-19.11 & 19.2 Dear Mr. Lund: The Planning Board has received a cost estimate of $500. from their Environmental Consultant for review of your Long Environmental Assessment Form. The above-mentioned sum must be paid in full before we can authorize our consultant to proceed with the review. The check should be made payable to the Town of Southold. Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding the above. Very truly yours, "Rol~§r~G: Kass'ner Site Plan Reviewer Cc: Charles J. Voorhis, Nelson, Pope & Voorhis, LLC PLANNING BOARD MEMBEO BENNETT ORLOWSICI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Fax (631) 765-3136 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Robert Lund, RLA Architects C/o Graystone 2282 Momauk Highway Bridgehamton, NY 11932 Peconic Bay Winery Main Road, Cutchogue SCTM# 1000-103-19.1 & 19.2 Dear Mr. Lund, The enclosed report has been received fi.om the Architectural Review Committee, it is being sent to you for your information. If you have any questions, please contact this office. gi~ce~;ely, .t / Robert G. Kassner Site Plan Reviewer SOUTHOLD TOWN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE August 29, 2000 The ARC met at Town Hall at 4:00 PM. Members present were: Garrett A. Strang, Co-Chairman Robed I. Brown, Co-Chairman Sanford Hanauer, Mattituck Robert Keith, Mattituck, Secretary Howard Meineke, Cutchogue Herbert Ernst, Southold Aisc attending were Robert G. Kassner of the Planning Board Staff, David Saland, Charles M. Thomas, and Jeffrey T. Butler for Laurel Links. Moved by Garrett A. Strang and seconded by Howard Meineke, it was RESOLVED to APPROVE the MINUTES of the meeting of August 22, 2000. PECONIC BAY VINEYARDS (Main Road - Cutchogue, Pre-Submission) Moved by Sanford Hanauer and seconded by Herbert Ernst, it was RESOLVEB to APPROVE the application with CONDITIONS and to heartily ENDORSE the plan, especially the siting of the structure on the grounds. The conditions include location and matedal for the roof penetrations, location and screening of the air conditioning compressors, confirmation that power and service utilities will be underground, catalogue cuts of the building-mounted lighting fixtures, and samples of the stain for the siding and colors for the sign. Vote of the Committee: Ayes All. CRAIG SIRACUSA, RE, REGIONAL DIRECTOR September 14, 2000 STATE OF NEW YOrk DEPartmENt OF TRANSPORTATION VetEraNs MEMOriaL HigHwaY HauppaugE, N.Y. 11788 JOSEPH H. BOaRDMAN COMMISSIONER Mr. Robert Lurid Robert Lund Associates Architects, Ltd. 4829 East Lake Harriet Parkway Minneapolis, Mn. 55409 Your Aueust 10. 2000 Submission Peconic Bay Winery Route 25, Cutchogue Our Case No. 00-233P iPi'ann[ng 2otlrd Dear Mr. Lund: This concerns the site plans for the above noted project which were submitted to us for review. Prior to the issuance of a Highway Work Permit, we require that the following items be addressed and three copies of a revised site plan be resubmitted to this office. Use standard drop curb for entrances to site. Curb cuts shall be 24'-0" wide at the throat with 3'-0" flag section of concrete either side of the apron. Install concrete curb and sidewalk full fi'ontage. A five foot snow storage area will be provided between the back of the concrete curb and sidewalk. Shoulder shall be saw cut and curbing face form to be placed on edge of saw cut shoulder. 3. Provide details for shoulder restoration. Provide a Maintenance and Protection of Traffic plan for shoulder closure and lane shift. It will be necessary to shift eastbound traffic into the westbound lane when doing curb and shoulder work. 5. Remove details for asphalt pavement. Construction on Page A-3. Revised plans must include all construction details, item numbers and Maintenance and Protection of Traffic details as per enclosed booklets. Mr. Robert Lund September 14, 2000 Page 2 Question concerning this case shall be directed to Mr. Vito Lena at (631) 952-6020. All future correspondence shall be directed to him at the above noted address. Very truly yours, Original Si~ed By A.W. BACHNER A.W. BACHNER, P.E. Civil Engineer III Traffic Engineering and Safety Attachment CCi Mr. Raymond Jacobs, Town of Southold Ms. Valerie Scopaz, Town of Southold.~ AWB:VFL:JS NELBON~ POPE CHARLES J. VOORH~S, CER AICP · ARTHUR J. KOERBER, RE. · VINCENT G, DONNELLY, RE. VICTOR BERT, RE. · JOSEPH R. EPIFANIA, RE,'* ROSERT G,NELSON, JR., RE, PAUL M. RACZ, RL.S. September 12, 2000 Bob Kassner Town of Southold Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Re: Peconic Bay Vineyard Main Road, Cutchogue Dear Bob: I am in receipt of the EAF and site plan for the above referenced project. At this time I would recommend a fee of $500.00 for review of the EAF, field inspectiOn, and preliminary review letter including comments on potential traffic impacts. Thank you for your attention to this matter, and please call if you have any questions. Very truly yours, NELS~O]~, POPE & VOORItlS, LLC ~2harles~oorhis, CEP, AICP Prop. No. 00-492 EP 15 2000 PLANNING BOARD MEMBE~ BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Fax (631) 765-3136 Telephone (631) 765-1938 /A ,2000 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Re: Lead Agency Coordination Request Dear Reviewer: The purpose of this request is to determine under Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act-SEQRA) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 the following: 1. Your jurisdiction in the action described below; 2. Your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead agency; and 3. Issues of concern which you believe should be evaluated. Enclosed please find a copy of the proposal and a completed Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) to assist you in your response. Project Name: ?~f. ~ f'/./~ ~/~ "/ Requested Action: ~o/~',57-~/-,~7'/~,~/ O?g ~) /~ ,.~,,3~7 ,.~'~4/),'~'g. SEQRA Classification: ( ) Type I ~ Unlisted Contact Person: 'r,~. ~"- ~/4 '~-3'/~ ~"' ~ (516) 765-1938 Page 2 Lead Agency Coordination Request The lead agency will determine the need for an environmental impact statement (ELS) on this project. Within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter, please respond in writing whether or not you have an interest in being lead agency. Planning Board Position: ('~.) This agency wishes to assume lead agency status for this action. ( ) This agency has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency status for this action. ( ) Other (see comments below) Comments: Please feel free to contact this office for further information. Chairman cc: Board of Appeals Building Department Southold Town Board Suffolk County Department of Health Services NYSDEC - Stony Brook ,:-. ~,~,-,,,,,,~,~-~--,- ........ ,, v, ?ubii~ Work.. /.t. SW~r~,,y Cut, cf EnGi.".ssrc New York State Department of Transportation · ='ho,, ~ , --" Suffolk County Water Authority *Maps are enclosed for your review rev. 4/94 PLANNING BOARD MEMBE~ BENNETT ORLOWSK/, JR. ~__~,~ ~ Chairman ~E~ C^~ Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Fax (631) 765-3136 Telephone (631) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 12, 2000 Robert Lund, RLA Architects C/o Graystone P.O. Box 1768 2282 Montauk Highway Bridgehampton, NY 11932 Re; Peconic Bay Winery 103-1-19.11 & 19.2 Dear Mr. Lund: The following resolution was adopted by the Southold Town Planning Board at a meeting held on Monday, September 11,2000: BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board start the lead agency coordination process on this unlisted action. Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding the above. Very truly yours, CUTCHOGUE FIRE DISTRICT 260 New Suffolk Road, PO Box 930. Cutchogue, NY 11935 Telephone (631) 734-6907 o Fax (631) 734-7079 September 4, 2000 Southold Town Planning Board Mr. Bennett Oflowski Jr. Chairman PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 SEP 0 ti ~ ~' Dear Mr. Orlowski, Ref: Peconic Bay Winery The board has reviewed the site plan for the above property and find that a Fire Well is not required. Thank you for forwarding the plan for our review. Very truly yours, Board of Fire Cgmmissioners Matthew J Martin, District Secretary BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Fax (631) 765-3136 Telephone (631) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August 29, 2000 Nelson, Pope & Voorhis 572 Wait Whitman Road Melville, NY 11747 Peconic Bay Vineyard Main Road, Cutchogue SCTM# 1000-103-1-19.1 1 & 19.2 Zone: Generai Business & Low Density Residentiai (R-80) Dear Chick, As discussed, enclosed are the LEAF and site plan for the Peconic Bay Vineyard. Please develop an estimate for review of the LEAF with speciai emphsis on the traffic that may be generated as this site is directly across from a shopping center. If you have any questions, please contact this office. '~Rob'ert 'G. Kassner Site Plan Reviewer BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS ~ GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Fax (631) 765-3136 Telephone (631) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August31,2000 Matthew Martin, Secretary Cutchogue Fire District New Suffolk Road Cutchogue, New York 11935 Dear Mr. Martin: Enclosed please find one (1) survey for the Site Plan for Peconic Bay Winery. SCTM# 1000-103-1-19.11 & 19.2 The enclosed site plan is being referred to you for fire access review and for your recommendations as to whether any fire- wells are needed. Please specify whether firewells are shallow or electric. O The enclosed subdivision is being referred to you for your recommendation at to whether any firewells are needed. Please specify whether firewells are shallow or electric. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Robert G. Kassner Site Plan Reviewer enc. SOUTHOLD TOWN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE August 22, 2000 The ARC met at Town Hall at 4:00 pm. Members present were: Garrett A. Strang, Co-Chairman Robed I. Brown, Co-Chairman Sanford Hanauer, Mattituck Robed Keith, Mattituck, Secretary Howard Meineke, Cutchogue Yan Reiger, Orient Also attending were Robed G. Kassner of the Planning Board Staff., Ira Haspel, AIA, for Martha Clare Vineyards and Robed Lund, AIA, for Peconic Bay Vineyards Moved by Garrett A. Strang and seconded by Sanford Hanauer it was RESOLVED to APPROVE the MINUTES of the meeting of July 17, 2000. MARTHA CLARA VINEYARDS (2595 Sound Avenue Mattituck ) Moved by Garrett Strang and seconded by Robed Brown, It was RESOLVED to TABLE consideration with the recommendation that the color of the stucco be reconsidered. In view of the facts that the building cannot be moved fudher back from the road, the architecture is not consistent with that of the Nodh Fork, and that the proposed structure is not in keeping with the existing barn, the Committee recommends that a softer, more subtle shade (like that in the amended rendering) be used to blend more harmoniously with the other materials to be used. The Building Depadment is asked to determine whether the suppoding structure to the proposed sign is considered pad of the sign. If so, it may be too big: if not, it could be an accessory structure located in the required setback. Vote of the Committee: Ayes All. PECONIC BAY VINEYARDS (Main Road - Cutchogue, Pre-Submission) Moved by Yan Rieger and seconded by Robed Keith, it was RESOLVED to TABLE consideration until the meeting to be held at 4:00 p.m.. on Tuesday, August 29. However, the consensus is an enthusiastic endorsement of the concept. Vote of the Committee: Ayes All. SOUTHOLD TOWN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE August 29, 2000 The ARC met at Town Hall at 4:00 PM. Members present were: Garrett A. Strang, Co-Chairman Robert I. Brown, Co-Chairman Sanford Hanauer, Mattituck Robert Keith, Mattituck, Secretary Howard Meineke, Cutchogue Herbert Ernst, Southold Also attending were Robert G. Kassner of the Planning Board Staff, David Saland, Chades M. Thomas, and Jeffrey T. Butler for Laurel Links. Moved by Garrett A. Strang and seconded by Howard Meineke, it was RESOLVED to APPROVE the MINUTES of the meeting of August 22, 2000. PECONIC BAY VINEYARDS (Main Road - Cutchogue, Pre-Submission) Moved by Sanford Hanauer and seconded by Herbert Emst, it was RESOLVED to APPROVE the application with CONDITIONS and to heartily ENDORSE the plan, especially the siting of the structure on the grounds. The conditions include location and material for the roof penetrations, location and screening of the air conditioning compressors, confirmation that power and service utilities will be underground, catalogue cuts of the building-mounted lighting fixtures, and samples of the stain for the siding and colors for the sign. Vote of the Committee: Ayes AlP. LAUREL LINKS (Main Road - Mattituck) Robert Brown recused himself. Moved by Robert Keith and seconded by Garrett Strant, it was RESOLVED to APPROVE the application with the CURRENT CONDITION that a color board be presented for the roofs and siding of the cart barn and maintenance barn and that prior to the issuance of the building permit a SUBSEQUENT CONDITION include location of roof penetrations and catalogue cuts of all external lighting fixtures. Vote of the Committee: Ayes AFl. BUCCANEER BOOKS (Nodh Road - Southold) Considering that the appearance and configuration of these prQposed metal buildings are more industrial than commercial in appearance (like the Jimbo Realty Company proposal), the Committee concludes that they should not be built on the a main road. Accordingly, it was MOVED by Yah Rieger and seconded by Howard Meineke to DISAPPROVE the application. Vote of the Committee: Ayes All. STEVE PAWLIK STORAGE BUILDING (Nodh Road - Mattituck) MOVED by Robed Brown and seconded by Robed Keith, it was RESOLVED to TABLE the application because the drawing of a commercial building lacks the seal of a licensed architect or professional engineer. Vote of the Committee: Ayes All. VAN DUZER GAS SERVICE COMPANY (Nodh Road - Southold) In view of the question of adequate distance from the road, the possible need for a variance and redesign, it was MOVED by Sanford Hanauer and seconded by Robed Brown to TABLE the application. Vote of the Committee: Ayes All. LAUREL LINKS (Main Road - Mattituck) Robed Brown recused himself. In the absence of several of the items requested at the meeting of June 1, 2000. it was MOVED by Robed Keith and seconded by Garrett Strang to TABLE the application. The missing items include: Club House. Detail of the railing above the kitchen and screening of trash receptacles. Cad Barn and Maintenance Bam. Restudy the entrance (non-cad and equipment) doors. Please submit a sample of the finished siding to allow consideration of the roof color. Halfway House. Screening of the trash receptacle. In addition the location of roof penetrations in all buildings are requested. Vote of the Committee: Ayes All. CRAIG S[RACUSA, PE. REGIONAL DIRECTOR August 16, 2000 STATE OF NEW York DEPARTMENT OF TrANSPOrTATION VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HauPPauge, N.Y. 1 1788 JOSEPh H. BOARDMAN COMMISSIONER Mr. Robert Lund Robert Lund Associates, Architects, Ltd. 4829 East Lake Harriet Parkway Minneapolis, MN 55409 Your August 8, 2000 Submission Peconic Bay Winery Route 25. Cutchogue SCTM 1000-103-01 Our Case No. 00-233P Dear Mr. Lund: This is to acknowledge receipt of your submission on the above permit application. In all future correspondence, please refer to the subject case number. The plans must also include the County tax map number. The subject material is being reviewed by Mr. Vito Lena. He can be contacted at (631) 952-6020 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Please send all correspondence to his attention. Thank you for your cooperation conceming this matter. Very truly yours, Original Signed By A.W. BACHNER A. W. BACHNER, P.E. Civil Engineer III Traffic Engineering and Safety CC: Ms. Valerie Scopaz, Town of Southold~--~---~ Mr. Raymond Jacobs, Town of Southold AWB:JH:JS AIl6 18 Southold Iow ROBERT LUND. ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4829 EAST L~KE HARRIET PARKWAY, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 P. O. BOX 1134, WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 (612) 927-0680 FAX (612) 927-0382 (516) 537-5500 FAX (516} 725-4478 ~ !0 '00 TRANSMITTAL TO: Mr. Vito Lena ~~_..__~ NYSDOT, Region 10 ~~~-~ NYS Office Building ~--4-~ 250 Veterans Highway Hauppauge, NY 11788 (631) 952-6068 DATE: August $, 2000 FROM: Ro~ Lund PRO~CT ~MBER: Peconic Bay W~e~, Cutchogue, NY Please find the following prints for your approval: A-1 thru A-3; C-1 - Site Plan, Grading and Parking, Paving Details and Specifications and Drainage and Calculations Submission drawings for the re-location of the entry driveway, off Route 25, into the new winery tasting barn for Peconic Bay Winery. Please contact us at (612) 927-0680 with any Robert Lund Pe~_08_08trLena question~_~ _R.~.E ¥.18 E O', ' ,' ' _ J WRITE ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES 4829 EAST LAKE HARRIET PARKWAY, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 P.O. BOX 1134, WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 ARCHITECTS; LTD. (612) 92%0680 FAX (612) 927-0382 (516) 537-5500 FAX (516) 725-4478 TO: DATE: FROM: PROJECT NUMBER: TRANSMITTAL Mr. Robert Kassncr Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 August 8, 2000 Robert Lund 9916 Peconic Bay Winery AUG 1 1 2000 Southold Town Planning Board Please find some supplemental prints for the enclosed for Site Plan Application: I mistakenly omitted the rendered exterior elevations of the Tasting Barn when we sent the submission package. We are also including an extra, clearer, set of the sanitary and drainage calculations for your review. The calculations on C-1 did not print very clearly. Please contact us at (612) 927-0680 with any questions. Robe~ Lund Pec00 08 08tn~as PECONIC BAY WINERY NEW TASTING BARN SANITARY AND DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS AS PREPARED BY BURTON, BEHRENDT, SMITH PC - ENGINEERS , ARCHITECTS AND SURVEYORS SANITARY CALCULATIONS: PROPERTY LOCATED IN GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT ZONE IV, 600 GPD/AC ALLOWABLE FLOW FOR SITE: 27.032 4- AC X 600 GPD/AC = 16,219 GALLONS PER DAY PROPOSED FLOWS: FARM STAND $12 + S.F. X 0.05 GPD/SF = 15.6 GPD FLOW STORAGE SHEDS: 1153 + SF + 549 4- SF + ,380 4- S.F. + 256 4- S,F.' = 2,338 4- S.F. 2,338 SF X 0.04- G/SF = 9.3.5 +'GPD WINERY BUILDING 2,090 4- S.F. X 0.04 GPD/SF = 83.6 GPD RESTAURANT, 46 SEATS SANITARY 10 GPD/SEAT = 4.60 GPB 46 SEATS KITCHEN 20 GPD/SEAT = 920 GPD/SEAT = 920 GPD TOTAL FLOW TO RESTAURANT SYSTEM = 1572.7 GPD. PROVIDE (1) 8' DIAMETER BY 5' EFFECTIVE DEPTH PRECAST CONCRETE GREASE TRAP PROVIDE 2 DAYS STORAGE IN SEPTIC TANK, 1572.7 GPD FLOW X 2 = 3,145.4 GALLON MINIMUM CAPACITY SEPTIC TANK REQUIRED, PROVIDE (1) 3;600 GALLON PRECAST CONCRETE SEPTIC TANK FINAL LEACHING POOLS- USE 10 FOOT DIAMETER PRECAST CONCRETE SANITARY LEACHING POOLS 1,572.7 GPD FLOW / 1.5 G/SF = 1,0¢8.7 SF REQUIRED 1,04.8.7 SF/ 31.4. SF/VF = 33.4- VF 10 FOOT DIAMETER POOLS REQUIRED USE (4-) 10 FOOT DIAMETER BY 9 FOOT DEEP POOLS PROVIDING 36 VF' EFFECTIVE DEPTH AND AREA RESERVED FOR 50 % FUTURE EXPANSION OF LEACHING FACILITIES TASTING BARN SYSTEM 7,000 4- SF X 0.05 GPO/SF = 350 GPO 6,825 4- SF STORAGE X 0.04 GPD/SF = 275.0 GPD 94-0 SF OFFICES X 0.06 G/SF = 56.4. 4- GPD TOTAL FLOW TO TASTING BARN SYSTEM = 680 GPO. PROVIDE 2 DAYS STORAGE IN SEPTIC TANK 680 6PD FLOW X 2 = 1,560 GALLON MINIMUM CAPACITY SEPTIC TANK REQUIRED PROVIDE (1) 20DO GALLON PRECAST CONCRETE SEPTIC TANK FINAL LEACHING POOLS- USE I0 FOOT DIAMETER PRECAST CONCRETE SANITARY LEACHING POOLS 680 GPD FLOW // 1.5 G/SF = 4-53.3 SF REQUIRED 45.3.3 SF/ ..'3t.4 SF/VF = 14.4- VF 10 FOOT DIAMETER POOLS REQUIRED USE (2) 10 FOOT DIAMETER BY 9 FOOT DEEP POOLS PROVIDING 18 VF EFFECTIVE DEPTH AND AREA RESERVED FOR 50 % FUTURE EXPANSIOI~ OF LEACHING FACILITIES RLA Architects 4829 E. Lake Harriet Parkway, Minneapolis MN 55409 61 2,927.0680 1 DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS: PROVIDE STORAGE FOR 100 % OF A 2 INCH RAINFALL FOR IMPERVIOUS AREAS PROVIDE 15 % sTORAGE OF A 2 INCH RAIN FOR PERMIABLE SURFACES USE 10 FOOT DIAM.E~ER PRECAS~ CON:f~REYE DRAINAGE STRUCTURES RATED AT 68.4.2 CF/VF DEPTH SYSTEM "A" C.A, = 19 800 + SF 19,800 SF X 2/12 X 1.00%'= .~,366 ~ CF STORAGE REQUIRED 3,366 CF / 68;42 CF/MF ~ 4.9.2 ~)f REQUIRED USE (5) 10 FOOT DIAMETER' BY 10 FOOT EFFECTIVE DEPTH POOLS. 50 VF TOTAL DEPTH SYSTEM "B" C.A. = 6.000 + SF 6,000 SF X 2/12 X 100% = 1;020 ± CF STORAGE REQUIRED 1.020 CF / 66.42 CF/VF = 14..9 VF REQUIRED USE (2) 10 FOOT DIAMETER BY 10 FOOT EFFECTIVE DEPTH POOLS. 20 VF TOTAL DEPTH SYSTEM "C" C.A. = 4.180 :~ SF 4,180 SF X 2/12 X 100% = 710.4 + CF STORAGE REQUIRED 710.4 CF / 68.42 CF/VF = 10;4. VF REQUIRED USE (1) 10 FOOT DIAMETER BY il FOOT EFFECTIVE DEPTH POOL, 11 VF TQTAL DEPTH SYSTEM "D" C.A. : 18,700 :::E SF 18;700 SF X 2/12 X 100% -- 3,179 + CF STORAGE REQUIRED .3.179 CF / 68.42 CF/VF = 46.5 VF REQUIRED USE (5) 10 FOOT DIAMETER BY 10 FOOT EFFECTIVE DEPTH POOLS, 50 VF TOTAL DEPTH SYSTEM "E" C.A. = 6,125 ± SF IMPERVIOUS, 8.000 ± SF PERMIABLE 6.125 SF X 2/12 X 100% = 1.04-1 ± CF STORAGE REQUIRED 8,000 SF X 2/12 X 15% = 204. ± CF STORAGE REQUIRED TOTAL STORAGE REQUIRED = 1 245 + CF 1.24.5 CF / 68.4-2 CF/VF = 18.2 VF REQUIRED USE (2) 10 FOOT DIAMETER BY 10 FOOT EFFECTIVE DEPTH POOLS. 20 VF TOTAL DEPTH SYSTEM "F" C.A. = 6.150 ± SF 6,150 SF X 2/12 X 100% = 1.04.5.5 '+ CF STORAGE REQUIRED 1.04.5.5 CF / 68.42 CF/VF = 15.5 VF REQUIRED USE (2) 10 FOOT DIAMETER BY 10 FOOT EFFECTIVE DEPTH POOLS. 20 VF TOTAL DEPTH SYSTEM "G" C~A. = 5,250 J:: SF 5.250 SF X 2/12 X 100% -- 892.5 + CF STORAGE REQUIRED 892.5 CF / 68.42 CF/VF = 15.0 VF REQUIRED USE (1) 10 FOOT DIAMETER BY 1.3 FOOT EFFECTIVE DEPTH POOL, 1,3 VF TOTAL DEPTH SYSTEM "H" C.A. = 12,175 ± SF 12 175 SF X 2/12 X 100% = 2.070 ± CF STORAGE REQUIRED 2,070 CF / 68.4.2 CF/VF = .30.3 VF REQUIRED USE (3) 10 FOOT DIAMETER BY 11 FOOT EFFECTIVE DEPTH POOLS, 3..3 VF TOTAL DEPTH SYSTEM "1" C.A. = `3.:300 :t: SF 3,.300 SF X 2/12 X 100% = 561 :t CF STORAGE REQUIRED 561 CF / 68.42 CF/VF = 8,2 VF REQUIRED USE (1) 10 FOOT DIAMETER BY 10 FOOT EFFECTIVE DEPTH POOLS, 10 VF TOTAL DEPTH SYSTEM "J" C.A. = 6,800 J:: SF 6,800 SF X 2/12 X 100% = 1,156 :/: CF STORAGE REQUIRED 1,166 CF / 66.42 CF/VF = 16.9 VF REQUIRED USE (2) 10 FOOT DIAMETER BY 10 FOOT EFFECTIVE DEPTH POOLS, 20 VF TOTAL DEPTH RLA Architects 4829 E. Lake Harriet Parkway, Minneapolis MN 55409 612.927.0680 2 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES 4829 EAST LAK~ HARRIET PARKWAY, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 P.O. BOX 1134, WA1NSCOTr, NY 11975 TRANSMITTAL TO: DATE: FROM: PROJECT NUMBER: Mr. Robert Kassner Town Hail 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 August 7, 2000 Robe~ Lund 9916 Peconic Bay Winery ARCHITECTS, LTD. (612) 927-0680 FAX (612) 927-0382 (516) 537-5500 FAX (516) 725-4478 Please find enclosed for Site Plan Application: 6 sets: Site Plan Review Package Sheets A-1 through A-3, C-1 and L-1 & L-2 Includes Keymap, Site plans and Pavement Details 2 sets: Architectural Review Package Sheets A-1 through A-16, C-1 and L-1 & L-2 Includes Site plans, Floorplans, Elevations and Sections 1 Copy: (2 sheets) Before and After "Birds-Eye" view of site I Copy: (2 sheets) Existing Site Photographs 1 Copy: (1 sheet) Architectural Materials Palette Sample Board of Cement Stone Veneer An Application Fee check for $406.48 Please Contact us at 612.927.0680 with any questions. Robert Lund AU6 0 9 2000 $outhold Town Pec00,_08,_07tr,doc Planning Board LASER FICHE FORM Planning Board Site Plans and Amended Site Plans SPFile Type: Approved Project Type: Site Plans Status: Final Approval SCTM #: 1000 - 103.-1-19.2 Project Name: Peconic Bay Winery Tastinq Barn Address: NYS Route 25, Cutcho,que Hamlet: Cutcho,que Applicant Name: Paul Lowerre, LavcorAgricultural Owner Name: LavcorA,qricultural Zone 1: R-80 Approval Date: 6/11/2001 SCANNED _~Record~s Management OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL INFORMATION A data indicates that we have received the related information End SP Date: 6/11/2001 Zone 2: Zone 3: Location: NYS Route 25, Cutcho.que SC Filin.q Date: C and R's: Home Assoc: R and M Agreement: SCAN Date: NORTH ELEVATION PECONIC BAY WINERY CUTOHOGUE, NY RLA ARCHITECTS SCALE: 1/1 6"=1 '-0_ PE0,00.06.29 Peconic BaV Winery New Tasting Barn Site Plan Application Neighboring Property Photographs RLA Architects, Ltd. August 4, 2000 Paconic Bay Winery New Tasting Barn Site Plan Applioation Neighboring Property Photographs RLA Arohitects, Ltd. AuDust 4, 2000 i" X 12' ROUGH SAWN CEDAR WITH I" X 2" ROUGH SAWN CEDAR BA%FEN ALL BOARD AND B$~EN STAINED WRTE PAINTED S4S CEDAR TRIM AT CLERESTORY 16' RED CEDAR ROOF SH N~L~- ~ATURALLY V~BATBERED 6" X 6" & 6" X 8'¢ %UMBLED CONCR~E PAVERS PEVt~aER COLOR: USED THOUGHOUT DROP-OFF AFIEA 4'-0" POST AND RA!L FENCE NORTHERN WHTE CEDAr, STAh~ED 2" CEMENT STONE VENEER (SEE ENCLOSED SAMPLE BOARDS) STANDING SEAR/: COPPER ROOF PATINA ACCELERATOR APPLIED AT iNSTALLATiON Peconic Bay \A/inerv New Tasting Barn Site Pian Application Material & Color Samples PANELED SECTON OF Vt/EST CONNECTING BR'DGE BETWEEN BARi',; AND RLA Architects, Ltd. , T ' PAINTFD CEDAR FRAMES TOWER TO BE PA,NT=- MDC BOARD Vel ~ - SITE PLAN DATA SCTM # 1000-103-01-19.11 & # 1000-103-01-19.2 Lots Merged 07/2000 OWNER: Lavoor Agricultural Inc. o/o Howard Presant Davidoff & Malito 605 Third Avenue, 34~h Floor New York, NY 1 0158 ARCHITECT: Robert Lund LiC, # 0135999 Robert Lund Associates Architects, Ltd. 4829 E. Lake Harriet Pkvvy Minneapolis, MN 55409 612. 927, 0680 612~927. 0382 fax WainsooE, NY 11975 631.537.5500 631.725.4478 fax LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: Angela Fowler Landscape Architect 39 We~ 38~n Street, Suite ¢10C New York, NY 10018 212, 391, 9699 212,944.1313fax SURVEYOR & CIVIL ENGINEERS: Jim Behrendt Lic.# 049378 Burton Behrendt Smith PC Engineers, Architects, Surveyors 244 East Main St. Patohogue~ NY 11772 EXISTING ZONING: GENERAL BUSINESS (B) LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-80) EXISTING LOT AREA: (for merged lots) General Business (B) 5 684 ACRES (247,61 0.56 S.F.) Low Density Residential (R-80) 21.347 ACRES (929,903.36 S.F.) Total 27,031 ACRES (1,177,513,92 S.F.) EXISTING BUILDING AREA: 10,118 S.F, EXISTING LOT COVERAGE: (B) 4 08% (R-80) 0 00% Total .85% PROPOSED BUILDING AREA: Tasting Barn Total PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE: (B) ~-.~% (R-80) 0.0O% Total ALLOWABLE # OF USES: (B) (B-80) Total PROPOSED # OF USES - GENERAL BUSINESS (B): 1. PROPOSED TASTING BARN (1.~;~1~'. s.f.) l~,~D2.~- s.~'. 2. EXISTING FARM STAND (575 si.) 3. EXISTING WINERY PRODUCTION BUILDING (2415 s.f.) 4. EXISTING STORAGE (3067 s.f) 5. EXISTING FARMHOUSE (PHASE II PROPOSED RESTAURANT) (1300 s.f.) PROPOSED # OF USES - LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-80)' 1. EX~STING VINEYARD PARKING REQUIREMENTS - NEW TASTING BARN STORAGE -5-196~:f~4-aisaeBwL-'H390 o.f. 5 spaces- OFFICE, BUSINESS R~AIL BEVERAGE DISTRIBUTION 71 52 s.f. ¢ I ~oo / 180 g.f, ~ees~ TOTAL = 67 spao~ pARKING REQUIREMENTS - PHASE II PROPOSED RESTAURANT 1300 s.f. @ I space / 100 s.f 13 spaces 46 seats @ 1 space / 3 seats 15 spaces PARKING REQUIREMENTS - EXISTING FARM STAND 4 spaces Bin per stand 4 spaces PARKING REQUIREMENTS - EXISTING WINERY PRODUCTION 2415 s.f. @ 1 space / 500 s.f, 5 spaces PARKING REQUIREMENTS - EXISTING STORAGE 3067 s.f. @ 1 space / 1000 s,f. 3 spaces Min. (1) One Tree / Median Total Lot Size General Business (B) = Total New Drives and Parking = Total Budding Coverage in (B) = Total Landscape Area in (B) = 247610.5 S.F. 61138.5 S.F. or 24.8% o)f (B) 17918 S.F. or 7.2% of ,(B) 168554 S.F. or 68% of ((B) 2 KEY N / F OWNER 1 Lavoor Agricultural Inc. 23 2 Little Bear Realty Inc. 24 3 Homan 25 4 Homart 26 5 27 6 Kaelin 28 7 Behr 29 8 Goodale & Decker 30 9 Maohinowski 31 10 Cielatta & Haas 32 11 Klos 33 12 Charnews 34 13 Kosoiusko 35 14 Landemann 36 15 Wick 37 16 Fogarty 38 17 Baker 39 18 Sowinski - Sub. Div. Lot 2 40 19 Sowinski- Sub. Div. Lot 1 20 Harbor Park Homes- Sub. Div. Lot 5 42 21 Harbor Park Homes - Sub. Div. Lot 4 43 22 ~ Harbor Park Homes- Sub. Div. Lot 3 44 Harbor Park Homes - Sub. Div. Lot 2 Harbor Park Homes- Sub. Div. Lot 1 Reinooker Coster Peters Imbriano DoroBki Mostupaniok Mott King NY Telephone Company K & K Associates Fdedman Scott 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 6O 61 62 63 64 65 66, '< / / t ! / / / / 'x ,,, x, / \ '. / CONSTRUCTION DRAVClNGS FOR: Tasting Barn PeconJc Bay Winer Main Road (Route 25) Cutcho~ue, NY 11935 PRO~ECT #9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCH1TECTS~ LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE HARR~T PARKWAY MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 by th~ drmving are owned by and the proper~ of Robert Lurid Associates Architects, Ltd and were ar~ated, evolved and de~eloped 013599 ISSUE # DAT~ DESCKIPTION DRA'VCD4G 2 WI-SC IR END OAD WORK Wi-lie TYP, 50~ U~XAAe. E,,[ROAD[ ENDwoRK MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC TWO LANE - TWO WAY TRAFFIC T 3.o I *,t I.,.Tm YP. I UIN. , ~TRAVEL LANE ~ TR~'VEL LANE SHOULDER -- -- - SHOULDER CLOSURE J Gl I I NOT TO SCALE I, / · ,~'c~', J jr ,\ x I%-> I AREAS wi SiEO SPEED L[NITS OF 55 OR~ ZONE SEE TABLE BGZ'Z IN IRE UDTCO. FOR TAPER LENGTH. LEGEND fuaiD IO ~ 0 ~o ~o %0 ~ Do $0.o J~ ZZ¸ ILo 'o CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogae, NY 11935 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES A~.CHITECTS? LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE ~T PARKWAY ~OLIS, ~ 55409 612.927.0680 F,~ 612.927.0382 P,O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537,5500 FAX 516.725.4478 \ X. \ \ \ '\ A= o DRAWING The Plasticity e-xcee~ 5.0 ~ i~ch 30-65 The mater~al shall c~o~m co the follo~g gradation: BASIS OF PA~T The tmiC pt~ce hid for ~his vork shall ~clude the cosc of furmishli~. objects. 10403.0903 - BA~ CUTTING ASPHALT CON~TE DESCRIPTION: This work shall consist of saw cuffing ex/sting asphalt concrete pavement or sidewalk at ~he locations ln~icate~ on the plans or where directed by the g~gtneer. PAV'T WIDTH AS DETERMINED BY REGIONAL PERMIT ENG, -- SEE APPROPRIATE DETAIL FOR MEETING EXIST. PAV'T. I/4"/FT (SEE NOTE 2) 17304.I011 (6") I ITEM 40Lll (6")(2 LIFTS} SEE NOTE ITEM 40S.13 Ilar") ITEM 403.1701 ITEM 203,01 TYPICAL SECTION ASPHALT PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION I BELOW 10202.99 - PAVEME~F EXCAVATION Description: The Contractor- shall remove and dispose of existing pavement as indicated on the plans or as ordered by the Engineer. Materials: Not specified. Construction Details: The Contractor shall remove the pavement in a neat wor~anlike manner by any suitable means that does not damage the adjacent pavement or existing underground utilities. Sawing to neat lines will be required before the removal of concrete pavement. This work must conform to the details shown on the plans. The removed concrete shall be properly dis- posed of by the Contractor, off the right-of-way a~ approved by the Engineer· Method of Measurem?nt: Pavement Excavation shall be ~easured by the number of gquere yards of pavement removed and disposed oil as shown on the plans or ordered by the Engineer. Basis of Payment: The unit price bid per square yard fQr this item shall include the cost of furnishing all labor, material~, and equipment necessary to remove and dispose of the pavement, mesh reinforcement, transverse joints, and longitudinal ties except that saw cutting will be paid for under the appropriate item. Payment shall be the same regardless of whether the entire thickness of pave- ment is remmved or simply the top surface of pave~nt is removed to provide a transition for resurfacing. 10608.0103 - CONCR~T~ DRIVEWAYS - CLASS F Description- ~e work shall consist of ~e construction of portland c~ment concrete ~rivewaym shown on t.~e plans or as specified by the En~ineer~ propor=ion~d,,in accordance with the aggregate weights specifled for Class F concrete in Table 501-3, Concrete Proportions. constr:ction ge~ails. Sec:~un 60S-~.01 o~ .t~e s3a~.~mr.d t{ec~l_. when placement is m~de between June 1 and September lo eno ~ee days at all other times. Method o~ ~asu~e~ent. ~lis work ~hall b~ measured by the 1/nee shown on the plans or as ordered by the Engineer. Basis of Pa__~_~. The unit price hid p~r cubic yard shall include all excavation, preparation of sutb~rade, wire fabric for reinforcement, and all other material~, ~uipment, and i~bor necess~y to Complete the work as called for on the plans or specified by the~ngineer. Payment at the unit bid price will be mad~ after the concrete ~iveways and curin~ application have bee~ properly placed~ TOP OF PAV'T, PROP'-'~'N .'. 221/2" DETAIL, CONCRETE CURB TYPE A ITEM 10609.2801 THE END OF CURD NOT ABUTTING EXISTING CURB SHALL BE RAMPED DOWN TO ZERO HEIGHT REVEAL IN THE LAST 10 FEET AT LOCATIONS FACING TRAFFIC, NOTE: DEPTH TO BE INCREASED BY REGIONAL PERMIT ENG. TO 8" (~ LIFTS) IN AREAS WITH HIGH TRUCK TRAFFIC ASPHALT PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION ITEM DESCRIPTION 203.01 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION AND EMBANKMENT 17304.101t SUBBASE COURSE - TYPE 1011 40%11 ASPHALT CONCRETE - TYPE 1 BASE COURSE 403.13 ASPHALT CONCRETE - TYPE 3 BINDER COURSE 403.1701 ASPHALT CONCRETE - TYPE 6F TOP COURSE (HIGH FRICTION) MARSHALL DESIGN NOTES: ASPHALT PAVEMENT WIDENINGS WILL ONLY BE PERMITTED ADdACENT TO EXISTING FULL DEPTH ASPHALT PAVEMENT. WHERE THE EXISTING PAVEMENT IS CONCRETE, CONCRETE WIDENING MUST BE USED. WHERE THE EXISTING PAVEMENT IS COMPOSITE, A COMPOSITE WIDENING MUST BE CONSTRUCTED. WHERE THE EXISTING PAVEMENT CROSS-SLOPE IS DIFFERENT FROM 1/4" PER FOOT, THE PROPOSED PAVEMENT SLOPE SHALL MATCH THE EXISTING PROVIDED THE SLOPE WILL BE ~"/FT. MINIMUM AND ~"/FT. MAXIMUM. WHERE A SLOPE WITHIN THIS RANGE CANNOT BE OBTAINED, RESURFACING OF THE EXISTING ROADWAY TO CORRECT ITS GROSS-SLOPE MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE REGIONAL PERMIT ENGINEER. EXIST, J TOP PAV'T, BINDER BASE T SUBBASE EM 10403.0903 (FULL DETAIL DEPTH) MEETING EXIST. ASPHALT PAWL (NO RESURFACING) DESIRABLE, SEE NOTE 1 SNOW STORAGE STRIP 5'-0", DESIRABLE SEE NOTE i/j/FL OFFSET STRIP 3'-O". DESIRABLE SEE NOTE 2 --ITEM 10609.2801 OR / 10609.2802 ITEM 608.0101(4"1 ITEM 20%01 TYPICAL SECTION SIDEWALK AREAS ITEM DESCRIPTION 203.01 GOB,OlD1 608.02D1 10609,Z801 10609,3802 CONCRETE 612.01 SODDING UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION AND EMBANKMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALKS AND DRIVEWAYS ASPHALT rlNCRETE SIDEWALKS AND BICYCLE CONCRETE CURB TYPE A CURB TYPE B PATHS >_, SIDEWALK AREAS ~ ri, NOTESJ ~ L l. WHERE TRE DISTANCE FROM THE FACE OF PROPOSED CURB TO THE '~,'I / HIGHWAY BOUNDARY IS LESS THAN 13 FT., THE REGIONAL PERMIT ~ ,J' ENG NEER MAY REQUIRE THE PERMITTEE ~0 DEDICATE PROPERTY lO ~-' ' PARK NG OUTSIDE THE HIGHWAY BOUNDARY SHALL BE CONTROLLED BY ~'~ ' CURBS, PARKING BLOCKS, ETC, TO ASSURE THAT ~EHICLES DO NOT [, OVERHANG THE SIDEWALK AREA, 2, THE "OFFSET STRIP" MINIMUM WIDTH SHALL BE I FY, IN AREAS WHERE q UTILITY P3LES ARE LOCATED IN THE "SNOW STORAGE STRIP" OR ',L THERE ARE NONE, ~ : SURFAC~ RESTORATION OF THE "OFFSET ~TRIP" SHALL BE AS INDICATED ~OR THE "SNOW BTm,AGE SSRIF' BELOW, ,i 3. IN GENERAL, THE STATE R~QUIRES A MtNIMU~ THREE FOOT OFFSET ', STRIP FOR UT~LI~? POLE PLACEME,NTS NOW OR IN THE FUTURE. WHEN APPLYING FOR A PERMIT, THE APPLI,CANT MUST BE ABLE TO '''Ti ADEQUATELY JUSTIFY ANY OFFSET STRIP OF LESS THAN THREE FEET. WHERE "OFFSET STRIP" WIDTHS ARE 1 Fl,, THE MINIMUM "SNOW STORAGE SZ~IP" WIDTH SHALL BE 3 FT., WHEREVER THE "SNOW STORAGE STRIP" WIDTH IS LESS THAN 5 FT.. THE SIDEWALK SHALL BE EXTENDED TO }HE HIGHWAY BOUNDARY. THE SURFACE DF THE 'SNOW STORAGE STRIP" SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: A) ITEM 60B.0201 AT 3 INCH THICKNESS B) ITEM 608,0~01, A INCHES THICK AND SCORED 30 INCHES ' CENTER TO CENTER. C) ITEM 612~01 DR OTHER MATERIALS - THESE MATERIALS MAY ONLY BE USED WHERE THEIR USE IS IN KEEPING WI~H THE CHARACTERISTICS : OF THE SURROUNDING AREA AND WHERE APPROVAL FOR THEIR USE HAS BEEN OBTAINED FROM THE AGENCY (STATE, COUNTY, TOWN, OR VILLAGEI WHICH WILL ~AINTAIN THE SNOW STORAGE STRIP AREA, 5. THE MIHIMUM CLEAR WIDTH OF SIDEWALKS SHALL BE B FEET, 6, THE MAXIMUM SIDEWALK CROSS PITCH SHALL BE ~" PER FOOT, THE STATE ~AY REOUIRE THE RELOCATION OF UTILITY POLES TO A LOCATION WITHIN THE "OFFSET STRIP". SHOULD RELOCATION BE REOUIRED DETAILS AND LOCATIONS WILL BE FURNISHED TO THE PERMIT APPLICANT. s-I ITEM 10%08,0102 {4") ITEM 10608,010J [6") ' DRIVEWAY WD)TD ~-4-'-0" ~1 i ~SCORE fi/I/I/'/, MA,KS / / I / / / I SEE ]/4" EXPA, NSION / , JOINT VAR. SLOPES ///" -J-,.,.J JOINT DRIVEWAY WlDrlt +6' MIN. 15' PLAN DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTION ITEM 10608,0102 (4")). NOTE 6 DETAIL "B" CUDD-/ NOTE: ~3' MINIMUM. INCREASE NECESSARY TO ATTAIN 1:12 SLOPE. ITEM ,o6o,.o,o i,,,i + I, io o .o,o Y4" EXPANSION ~5-O':. SEE NOTE JOINT % , J , //-- · SEURE MARKS ., I /% " b' l SEE NOTES ON IF r -m SHEET 14C . ADVANdE mSTAN~8 6~TNE~N ~ T ~L W~NING SIGN AND BEGINmNG OF LANE CLOSUR~ OR WORK HIGHWAY WORK WORK AREA [ ADVAN~,E D~STANOE SITUATION LOCATION YYPEI (FEETI ITEM DESCRIPTION lOBOB,Ol02 IOBOB,OI03 CONCRETE SIDEWALK - UNREINFORCED CONCRETE SIDEWALK -' CLASS F CONSTRUCTION DR~WINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Wirier7 Mai~ Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 PROJECT #9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4829 EA~T LAK~ HARR~T PARKWAY ]Vi~NNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, i"P/' 11975 516.537,5500 FAX 516.725,4478 l hereby cerK~ that thi~ plan, specification, or report wasprepared SCALE ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION NOTES ON DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTIONs 1. DETAILS SHOW METHOD OF SLOPING AND CONSTRUCTING DRIVEWAy APRONS. WHERE CONCRETE SIDEWALK IS NOT REOUIQED & ~DIRT" DRIVEWAYS NOT SPECIFIED THE DRIVEWAY IS TO BE CONSTRUCTED OF 3" OF ITEM 608.0201 AND CONSTRUCTED TO THE LAYOUT AND SLOPES SHOWN IN THESE DETAILS. 2, WHERE DRIVEWAY APRONS ARE ASPHALT (ITEM 608.0201) A 1" HIGH DROP CURB SHALL BE PLACED THROUGH THE DRIVEWAY. (ITEM 10609.2801L I zJ 3. THIS SLOPE MAY BE REDUCED TO ¼./FT. AS NECESSARY FOR SMOOTHER TRANSITION TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES. 4. DRIVEWAY WIDTHS MAY HAVE TO BE ADJUSTED TO MEET EXISTING DRIVEWAY WIDTHS AND SKEW ANGLE APPROACHES, 5. THE DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTION DETAILS SHOW CURB CONTINUOUS THROUGH CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRONS, BUT WHERE SEPARATE CURB AND S}DEWALK DETAILS APPLY THE CURB WILL IN FACT TERMINATE EITHER SIDE OF CONCRETE APRONS (LIMITS OF ITEM 1060B.010~) AND THE APRON CONSTRUCTED AS SHOWN ON THIS SHEET. 6. THESE SURFACES SHALL 8E GIVEN A SLIP RESISTANT TEXTURE, A COARSE BROOM FINISH PERPENDICULAR lO THE SIDEWALK SLOPE IS ACCEPTABLE. COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAYS ONLY THE FIRST F'ULLS' FLAG OF SIDEWALiK TO EITHER OF THE DRIVEWAY SHALL BE 6" THICK, WIRE FABRIC REINFORCED '(ITEM 10608.0103) AS SHOWN IN SECTION ItEM DESCRIPTION IO608.0103 CONCRETE SIDEWALK - CLASS F '. DIMENSON "C" SEE TABLE DWG. NO. T-t' EXISTING 'm DHIVEWAY 5'-0" SIDEWALK FULL HEIGHT NORMAL SIDEWALK CURB ~ ELEVATION--% | / ..... - - - -, .... ~ ..... I/~'/F l ...... t xT';,- ! ',.,, ...... G"/ I ,I ~ ~ .. . '~ · ' _. · 't~,, . ~'?.,':~';.~.'~'~1 I t I ~J ~&'/~;' ~¢ .. ~ ~ ' , , ','"~ ........ ~' '"' I" + ~ ~" ? ~' ~ %WIRE FABRIC DRIVEWAY. / r 'J . SECTION A-A ASPHALT DRIVEWAY CURB SECTIZON DRIVEWAY SECTION DRJkW~NG SIDE :1 I CONSTRUCTION Di~.WINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4829 EAST LAEE ~T PAR~WAY 612.927.0680 FAX WAINSCOTr, NY 11975 516:537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 N YT- 542 L diaclosadto anyperson, firm, oreorflorationfor NYT-541 EDGE OF PAVEMENT HCR LILC0-543 C.B. NYT-544 HCR NYT-545 EDGE OF PAVEMENT NYT-546 F.H. L~ ,,,o,.,,.,,..**~.,,,,,..,,..,,d,,,.,,..~,,, ~-.-~ (~6 00' WIDE ~ GHT-0F-WAY) MANHOLE ~* ~.~.o~ / ~ ' ' EL. 16.93 sc~: 7--. / ~ 62.o,'o % ~ ' --~ ' ~ ~' ~' ' :' ' ..... ~ ~>;'i~ ~ I /I I i~ ' I Q I I [ )~-.?o ~-~ ~ xx :'.' ~ 14.8' SOUTH ', :' , T lg9' ~ / ~o ! ~ ~' . x & ~ ~ ,~ ,~ -<.?. -~ -, ~ DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS: ,V --' ~APE VI~~ICAL[ ;- x ~ ,~ 1.6.9 '. ~ B 16¢7 , / /~ / . , ~ ¢ ~ I / ~ 2(, 4. P, .~0.3 P 20.5 . ~x gl ~ ' ~ " "'"""".*.-'.0'0' '~ : ~, z T ALNUTS ' U~z~ x ' o p 1~0 i I , ~ x x , ~ PR.R. ~LEE AS~HA ~CLR~ ~o ,~, ~ ~ --- (. ~ ~z~>,n ~ ~ ~ [ ~ i~0 ..... _ ..... y ~.~' · ~ ~ ~ ~ ~7'~'~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ' ~ _~NC. CU~8. u~a.u "'EP -_ ~ %~ ' ~= ~'~ . x x '~ ~ ~.~ z x ~ ~ ,, o x ~ ~ . x SANITARY CALCULATIONS: ............. 'q ~ ~ h PROPER~ LOCA~ IN CROUNDWA~R M~SEMENT ZONE IV, SO0 SURVEY, GRA~tNG, SANITARY SYSTEMS x /I I AND DRAINAG~ SYSTEMS DESIGNED BY I BURTON, BEHR~DT, SMITH PC / ENGINEERS, ARCHITECTS SURVEYORS x 0 80X 120 160 X , .... 7nNE B -- ~- - / 26 ~.~,, ,. . _ . / ~~ ' x ~ , ZONE 'R-80 ' ~~ ZONING BOUNDARY LiNE x / x ¢ ' ' O0 W ' 210 0 , , ,~ 31' "  / ~ x / / ~ 0 ~ x / ............... / / ~ , x ~ .......... / ~ ~ /, x I / / ~ ~ / x 1 / / ~ / I x / / I / / ~ / I D~G ~ ~ / , / 2: _LANT SCHEDULE: ~YB. 0TY. BOTANICAL NAME kc 9 AGA 6 AR 17 ~-1 ':. ~ BN ' 3 CC 3 las 10 .~P 17 COMMON NAME SIZE AmelmxcMer canadensis Shadbush 8'- 10' A. x. grandiflora "Aumrrm Brillance" Autumn Brillance Sarvicebarr 8.'-I0~ Paperbark Maple 2-1/2"-3" Autunm Flame Red Maple 2"-2-1/2" . Aumnm Flame Red Maple . 5"-6" cal. Heritage River Birch 8'-I 0' Redbud 2"-2-1/2" Scotch Pine 7'-8' Pin Oak 2"-2-1/2" A. rabmm 'Aumm, Hame' A. rubmm 'Autumn Fbme' Betula nigm 'He,'itage' Carcis canadensis P. sylve~tris Quarcus pa[ustris cOMMENT~ r: - Multistem . ~hrubs: Single Stem IDA Muhistem QTY..._ BOTANICAL NAME 13 43 EA 3 142 LF 3 MP 3 ~M 8 RC 5 _gO 3 ~ 36 SYB. QTY. Vines: ,Groundeovers: AU 123 GO 97 HS 473 LS ~ 320 ~PT 13.4 fiats COMMON NAME Cor~us alba 'Siherica' Cotoneastar dammerL'Lowfast' Euonymus alatus 'Compactus' H. macrophylla ~ikko Blue' Leueothoe axallafis Myrica pennsylvanica Pmnu~ maritima Rhododendron carolini~num R. 'Olga Mealtt' Rosa mgosa 'Albg BOTANICAL NAME SIZE coMMeNTS Tartarian Dogwood 3 gal. LowFast Cotoneaster 15%18" spread Dwarf Winged Burning Bush 30"-36" N'fl&o Blue Hydrangea .3 gal. Coast Leueo~oe 2 gal. Bayberry 3 gal. Beach Plum 5 gal. Carolina Rhododendron 5 gal. Olga Mezitt Rhcdodeadron 3 gal. White Rugosa Rose 24"-30" COMMON NAME SIZE COMMENTS Plydrangea anomala sub.peticlariClimbing Hydrangea Bearberry Sweet Woodruff Stella D'Oro Daylily Winter Jasmine Creeping Lilymff Spurge Arctostaphylos Uva-ursi Galinm oderamm Hemerocallis 'Stella D'Oro' Jasminum nudiflomm Liriope spicata Pachysandra terminalis P U 1'% A ):PT Ir + .L ! I ( I 5 gal. 4" pot 2-1/2 Qt. 2-1/2 Qt. 2-1/2 Qt. 4" pot 10 O/Bat /f CONSTRUCTION DRA~,rlNOS FOR~ Tasting Barn_, Peconic Bay W, ine~ Main K6ad 0~ute 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 PROJECT #9916 ROBEKT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCh['I~CTS~ LTD. SCALB IS~I3E ~ DATE DEsCRJF1/ON ANGELA W. FOWLER ~ Lan.d~caPe Architect': (Consultant: Planting Plan) 39 West 38m Street, Suite #10C NewYork, N.Y. 10018 Teh (212) 391-9699 ' Fax:~(212) 944-131~ Prefect Title: PECON!C BAY WINERy Cutchogue; New York Proiect No..L . #003.00 Drawing Title: :Planting Pla :LIGHT FIXTURE INDEX: ~ - S~h~bo,, Type. Manufacturer ' J~ PARKING STATISTICS AND REGULATIONS' · ~ ~4~-o'~.~ ~r~*-~,~ c:*-~ . . ~4";;'X~'~;~'/~"" "" ,~ _ .Ii . TREE OR BUDDING SURFAClg- [Ig~VI L~g~;fing,ipv~,~t,,-,,-',,~,-.,-,,v,' ,, ~-~lll M[OI31N'I~;D AD,11JSTABIuE g'IXTLrR~ r' BL-P, ~dth l~ed'n'~od;g'H-C!~/~ - Medina to Car Rafio:i ~ '7ol/q~TT, ~t~u~g ~/1~ CA~:~ ' [ }]I~p'~ ~--,,~, * . ,' ~0 I (ee.~'r U~Fr* ovem-%~. ~E ~ ,~?.u_~-er) ~ ~.~.._. -.. , ....~.' ' ' ~ 10 S.F./' Spac~ IWm4 1" = 20'" ~ ,~ I1 PATHL1G-tfrWfKIilN-GRADIfi X'LLLVZ:Ugaung,~.K/~ 2,726.SS.F./67-40.TS.F./Spaee?ropoead[ ~' | .IIIN{71PIONBOX 100A~IFII~ 120V Verde ' i il Srr~;r LIGIiT Focus Lafi~scage Lighting, Trees per Median:, , 0) o.e 2" C par Fl ' 8L-08-T10, .h~., I~0V, Cast ' 67 / 10 = 6.7 Trees Roquire~. I /~l ! ' l~ouvered Brtck Light, Black. (12) 2" - 2-1/2" Caliper Trees ?ropose~ - .d! PORTABI,~, SPRAR MOIINt'I~ KIM hghtmg, RL720BL, ,~ -.i · 1/6" ALUMINUM PANEL -- SCREEN PRINT SYMBOL HANBLBAPPED SYMBOL 2" SQ, ALUMINUM POST FINISH AS PER ~PECIFICATIONS FINISH GRADE EARTH CONCRETE FOOTING ' Specl~ 2= mits by replacrrg "120"~,h '277. //~ ~60x See page 45 ~ US PATENTSPENDING .. ,~W~_PA R20 Halogen 120 Vol'[ Di'e:C'ast Aluminum HILTZ' MOUNTING OPTIONS 36" X 12" BN7~I' / BR72 (~ A-21 Incandescent · S PECIIRCAT~O N S Hood: Spun copper, supporled on brass rads Husk: Casl bronze , , []Wine Tasting & - ANGELA W. FOWLER -. .Landscape Architect (COnsultant: Planting Plan) 39~ West 38_t:h Street, S~uite #10C .. .:, .NewjYorl~ N.Y. 10018 ' Tel: (212) 391-9699 Fax: (212) 9~4-1313 Pro]ect Title: PECONIC BAY WINERY Cutchogue, New Ynrk Proiect No.: #003.00 Drawing Title: DETAILS- Date: Scale: AS NOT, i) DraWing No.: L.O,, 202'-9 ¼" 45'-7 ~" DELIVERY ® OFFICE OFFICE MAI N FLOOR, - F,,EY PLAIN ® ® ® ® ® ® ® @ ® ® STORAGE ® ~LEVATOF< LO55Y 25'-7¼' MEN'5 ROOM 4G'-5" 39'-4' 22L4 ½" G3'-3" 23'-2 ½" I 0'-4" 2 GLO" 23 t '-3" 203'- I ~" 25L 10¼" 20'-5 ¼" 7'-0 ~" 20'-t I i" 75'-2" 50'-7 ½" CONSTRUCTION DRA~ViiqGS FOR: Tasting Barn Pet®nit Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutehogue, NY 11935 PROJECT #9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS~ LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE I-IARRiET PARKWAY MINNE&POLIS, MN 55409 612,927.0680 FAX 612,927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725,4478 SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION FOUNDATION - K, EY PLAI' 47'-4" 35'-,5" --7 .............. 7 .... 5 I- ..... ~ F ..... 7 22L4½'' 23L2 ½" 251'-3½" 2GL4" I DRAWING CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 PRO~ECT #9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTSt LTD 4829 EAST LAKE HARRIET PARKWAY MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NrY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 Ali ideas~ designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented by this drawing are owned by and the property of Rober~ £und .~ssoclates A~hiteet~, I~td. and were created, evolved and developed for t~e on, and in connection with the specific project. None of such ideas, de~tgns, arrangements or plans shall be used by or disclosed to any per, von, firm, or corporation for a~ purpose by me or under my direct szlpervt~ton and that I am a duly SCALE: 1/8" iL0" ISSUE # DATE DESCILiPTION 1 ROOF - KEY PLAN 203'-5 ~" <2> 7t TASTING ® ® ® 59'-2 ~" © © 58'-0" 22L4½'' ® ® <2> G3LI0½~' 59'-2 ~a ,, 203L5 ~4 ,I OFFICE SECOND FLOOR- K,,EY PLAN / DRAWING t Z q L N N 20u34z'' LJ F 14,_72z, I 2LO ¢" D'-~5" h- 7~5'-2 ¼" 44'-9" , I b b b 25'-4" / / / / / / / MAIN DARN - FOUNDATION PLAN ~ 'P2" '\ 1 7' 0-~" ~ r I 1 CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cmchogue, NY 11935 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, LTD. MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION I I I I I I I I · I I I I I I , / 1 DRAWING CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR: Tasting Barn PeconJc Bay Winery I O2'-& ~' 25'-2 6Z" Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 I I J / / 4829 EAST LAKE F~LRR~T PARKWAY / / 3 / 3 612 927.0680 FAX 612 927 0382 ~ ~ ~"~P J Jr fort~eon, a,dinconnec,o~ththe,p~c~cproj~c, ~oneof ~ ~ ~ I/ rll -' H/ lit I I H I ] ~whatso~erwtho~w~pe~ionofRob~tZundAsgoctates ~ ~ L ~ i I I ~ II / / I OFE~BLE OVE~ffAD POO~ I Ill I OYE~BLE OVE~EAD DOOR~ J l ~1 / / ~ bymeorundermydlrectsupe~lonand~atlam adu~ ~ -- q ~ . ~ ~ Q I ( ~ ~ II I ~ I ~ I ~ I ~ [ , 2 - ~ ~ Regist~ed~hitect under the la~ of the ~tate ofN~ Yor~ ~ V r .... ~ .~ MEN5 I ~ I ~o ~ M lu ~0[ 0 ~m ~ 245 ~[ 1 I~ ~ ~ ~ PAVING aO WINBE~ e 0 ~lo r L ~ J ~ ~ .... ~ ~ m ~ ' ~ L NE OF 5TO.GE OVE~A G ASOVE~ ~ I _ RESTROOM RECEFTION / ~ Gx ,2 ~CLED.==TIM~KDEAM - I It II/, ~ ~ - I ~ /~ L I I ASOVEFLUSHMOUNTTOFLOOKJOIDT5 I I % 0 I / llllll / 4~ I I / . 30I- I O ~ G 3L3 fl 3 9'-5 ~" ~,bmission or ~s~buUon ofdoa,m,n~ to meet o~emZ re~lato~ r~quiremen~ or for ' MAIN gARN - IRST LOOR PLAN A D~G I G'-3" I GL3'' I GL3'' 33L4 ~" a'-2 ½" as'-, ~" Z rk 35.0' TERRACE TASTI N G ROOM ~4'-~o~" 'INE DAI~ 3L3'' g'-2" P-,.O. P-,,.O. 35.5~ 50UTH GALLERY J WOMEN' ROOM MONITO~ ABOVE 3L9 ~' 5'-9 ~' CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR. Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 PROJECT #9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE ~T PARKWAY ~APOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 .411 ideas, dertgns, arrangements attd platts indtcated or represented 35'-3 3'- I" R.O. 2 STORAGE 22'-4 ½" ' )( 3'-g 24 3LG R.O. 8G'-3" R.O. R.O. MEN'5 ROOM STORAGE OFFICE 59'-2 1 MAIN DARN - SECOND FLOOR / DRAWING t 4L2" I G'-3" L 3o'-~ ~, 8'~5 ~" 49'-9 CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 PROJECT #9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES AR. CI-UTECTS, LTD. 4829 EAST LAICE IJ2M1RIET PARKWAY MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.06g0 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" ISSUE# DATE DESCR/PTION I 5HIPPING ANNEX- SECOND FLOOR PLAN 45'-7 ½" 5'-,5" 7L4'' I 2'-10¼" b PACKING ARE b L OPfiN TO DELIVERY 22L4" ~D 30E I 0" II I DUMPSTER AREA 47'-4" 4G'-3 ¢" x, \ / \ / \ 9'-G" / \/ /\ \ \ r F I '-2"- I 8L2" 4'-2 ¼" Iq -4. I L} O" N J I \\ ?~--~J 4'-I0" \ \ 22'-0" 3'-8" 4u I 0" 25'-8" 0 d 5HIPPING ANNEX- FIRST FLOOR PLAN 3 5HIPPING ANNEX- FOUNDATION PLAN DRAWING i CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Wine .r7 Main Road (Route 25) Cutchoguc, NY 11935 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ~CHITECTS, LTD. MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O, BOX 1134 ri-I] ....h ................ J .... !'~ Y EXTERIOR LIGHTING SCHEDULE SYMBOl TYPE MANUFACTURER MODEL # FINISH lA Wall unit BEGA/US 6590 Black lB Wail unit SEGA/US 6393 Black Recessed 2 SEGA/US 69411561 S~inless Soffit unit Re~cessed wall 3 BEGNUS 2036P Stainless unit 4 Up I~ghting KlM EL210 Black DRAWING CONSTRUCTION DRAV~NOS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Wine Main Road (Route 25) ' Cutchogu¢, NY 11935 PROYECT ~916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCD. r fECTS~ LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE IJ~RR1ET PAJDCWAY M1NNtAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1 I34 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725A478 All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represeated by this drawing are owned by and the property of Robert Lurid ~$~ociate~ ~hitects, £td. andwere created, evolved and developed for use on, and in connact~on with the speeifia project ~Vone of such ideo~, designs, arrangements or plans shall be used by or disclosed to mly person, firm, or cor2aora~on for any purpose whatsoever without written permission of Robert Lund.~$ociates 013599 ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWLING lI I I CONSTRUCTION DRAVvTNGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutohogue, NY 11935 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCtiC1 ECTS, LTD. 4829 EAST LAI~E HARRIET PARKWAY MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612~927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 by ttds drawtng are owned by and the proper~ of Robert Lund Associates Architects, Ltd. and were created, evolved and d~veloped for use on, and in connec~on with the specifie project. None of I hereby cer~fy that this plan, spectficatmn, or report wasprepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Architect under the laws af the ~tate of New Yor~ SCALE ISSUE # DATE DESCPdPTION ' i IN DRAWING I r i CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS~ LTD. P,O, BOX 1134 SCALE ,I DRAWING Z L1 tM- 'THP,,U ,i. -! CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 PROJECT #9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHI'I'ECTS~ LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE HARRIET PARI~WAY MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 by th~ drawing are owned by and the property of Robert Lund 013599 ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION A'I4 DRAWING ,/% t CONSTRUCTION DI~AW1NGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogae, NY 11935 PROIECT g9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS~ LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE I-IARR1E T PARKWAY MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 by this dra'~ing are owned by and the proper~ of Robert Lund Associates Architects, Ltd. and were created, evolved and d~eloped for use on, and in connec~on with the specific project None of · uch ideas, designs, arrangements or plans shall be used by or disclosed to any person, firm, or corporation for any purpose drchitects, Ltd. 013599 I DRXW 4G /5; CONSTRUCTION DRAWlNGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 PROIEGT #9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE HARR~T PARJ~WA¥ MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927 0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 SCALE 013599 1 A-16 DRAWING t I [ f-I L7 ¸t-i CONSTRUCTION DRAW1NGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 PROJECT #9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS~ LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE HARRIET PARKWAY MINNEAPOLIS, IVlN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 ri_jrt ............ rLJ7 _ . ~L~T I I iL_ 4-_ · .............. A'I7 DRAWING SITE PLAN DATA SCTM # 1000-103-01-19 11 & # 1000-103-01-19.2 Lots Merged 07/2000 OWNER: Paul Lowerre Lavoor Agricultural Inc. c/o Howard Present Davidoff & Mahto 605 Third Avenue, 34th Floor New York, NY 10158 ARCHITECT: Robed Lund L[c.# 0135999 Robert Lurid Associates Architects, Ltd, 4829 E, Lake Harriet Pkwy Minneapolis, MN 55409 612. 927. 0680 612,927. 0382 f9× ' ~, Wainsoott, NY 11975 63% 537. 5500 631. 725. 4478 fax LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: Angela Fowler Landscape Arohitaot 39 West 36th Street, Suite #10C New York, NY 10018 212. 391. 9699 212. 944. 1313 fax SURVEYOR & CIVIL ENGINEERS: Jim Behrendt Lic.# 049378 Burton Behrendt Smith PC Engineers, Architaots, Surve¢ors 244 East Main St. Patchogue, NY 11772 1 EXISTING ZONING: GENERAL BUSINESS (B) LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-80) EXISTING LOT AREA: (for merged ~ots) General Business (B) 5,684 ACRES (247,610,56 S,F ) Low Densit~ Residential (R-80) 21,347 ACRES (929,903.36 S,F.) Total 27.031 ACRES (1,177,513,92 S.F.) EXISTING BUILDING AREA: 10,118 S.F. EXISTING LOT COVERAGE' (B) 4.08% (R-80) 0.00% Total .85% PROPOSED BUILDING AREA: Tasting Barn 10,259 9.F. Total 1 7,918 S.F PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE' (B) 7.20% (R-80) 0.00% Total .87% ALLOWABLE # OF USES: (B) 247,610.56 / 50,000 S.F. = 8.25 (R-80) 1 Total 9.25 PROPOSED # OF USES - GENERAL BUSINESS (B): 1. PROPOSED TASTING BARN (13,712 s.f.) 2. EXISTING FARM STAND (575 s.f,) 3. EXISTING WINERY PRODUCTION BUILDING (2415 s,f) 4. EXISTING STORAGE (3067 s.f.) 5. EXISTING FARMHOUSE (PHASE II PROPOSED RESTAURANT) (1300 s f) PROPOSED # OF USES - LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-80): 1. EXISTING VINEYARD PARKING REQUIREMENTS - NEW TASTING BARN STORAGE 5196 s.f @ 1 space / 1000 s.f. 5 spaces OFFICE, BUSINESS 1364 s.f. @ 1 space / 100 s.f. 14 spaces RETAIL BEVERAGE DISTRIBUTION 7152 s.f, @ 1 space / 150 s f. 48 spaces TOTAL 67 spaces KEY N / F OWNER 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 Lavcor Agricultural Inc. Little Bear Realty Inc. Homan Homan Kaelin Behr Goodale & Decker Maohinowskl Cielatta & Haas Klos Chamews Kosoiusko Landemann Wick Fogarty Baker Sowinski - Sub, Div. Lot 2 Sowinski - Sub. Div. Lot 1 Harbor Park Homes- Sub. Div. Lot 5 Harbor Park Homes - Sub. Div. Lot 4 Harbor Park Homes - Sub. Div. Lot 3 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 3O 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 4O 41 42 43 44 PARKING REQUIREMENTS - PHASE 11 PROPOSED RESTAURANT 1300 s.f. @ 1 space / 100 s.f 13 spaces 46 seats @ 1 space / 3 seats 15 spaces PARKING REQUIREMENTS - EXISTING FARM STAND 4 spaces m[n per stand 4 spaces PARKING REQUIREMENTS - EXISTING WINERY PRODUCTION 2415 s.f. @ 1 space / 500 s.f. 5 spaces PARKING REQUIREMENTS - EXISTING STORAGE 3067 s.f. @ 1 space/1000 s.f. 3 spaces PARKING STATISTICS AND REGULATIOI~L~ ~ED TASTING~ MEDIAN to CAR Ration 10 S.F./Space Min. 2726.8 S.F. /67 = 40.7 0, P. /Space_ Proposed TREES per MEDIAN (1) one 2" Caliper Tree / 10 Spaces Min 67 / 10 = 6.7 Trees Required MEDIAN LANDSCAPE Min. Dimension = 8'-0' Min. Total S~ze = 100 S.F. Min. (1) One Tree / Median TOTAL SITE PARKING STATISTICS Main Tasting Barn Parking Lot = 26250 S.F. New Drives and Other Park~ng = 34888.5 S.F. (Produclien Bui/ding, Storage, Phase II Restaurant) Total Lot Size General Business (B) = Total New Drives and Parking Total Building Coverage in (B) Total Landscape Area in (B) = 247610.5 S.F. 61138.5 S.F. or 24.8% of (B)) 17918 S.F. or 7.2% of (B) 168654 S.F. or 68% of (B) Harbor Park Homes - Sub. Div. Lot 2 Harbor Park Homee- Sub. Div, Lot 1 Reinocker Coster Peters Imbriano Doroski Mostupaniok Mott King NY Telephone Company K & K Associates Fdedman Scott 45 48 47 48 49 5O 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66, AUG 09 2000 Somhold Town Plann[a¢ I~oerd N '\ ,,% \ \ \ / 2.4 N \ \ \ \ '%, N "%¸ CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOE: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutehogue, NY 11935 ROBERT LUNDASSOCIATESARCHITECTS~ LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE HARRIET PARKWAY MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, Ny 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 All ideas, designs, atwangement~ and plang indicated or represented Data SCALE ISSUE DATE DESCRIPTION ,22- DRAWING / / ~ .... Z .... \ \ x, "1 24 ¢4,,4' -e 9_4-10 sac ~-!- --" ~_ 7L,%~T - - 7 ', \ L.-, .... :'--'-L ..... ..'" ,'~F I,% % \ ':1 Z2 CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 1 i935 PROJECT ~19916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS1 LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE Iq~_RR1ET PARKWAY MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WA1NSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 DMe SCALE DRAWING ITeM 17304.1011 - SUBSASE C0~E, T~E 1011 2 inch 100 No. I0 No. 40 No. 200 Percent by Wei~ht 100 70-100 40-75 15-40 5-I5 2" 100 ¥, 50-85 No. 10 30--70 No. 40 15-40 MATERIAL D CONSTRUCTION DETAILS Ali of the requirements of Subsection 304-3 shall apply. nor } inch below 10403.0903 - SA~ uuiTING ASPF~LT CONCP~TE DESCRIPTION: &.%1 equipment proposed for this ~ork shall be approved by the Engineer CONST~UCTION DETAILS: Saw cutti~ sh~ll be zlo~ a neat line as indicat~ on the plans or ~ere 10202.99 - PAVEMEhFF EXCAVATION Descriptien: The Contractor shall remove and dispome of existin§ pavement aa indicated on the plans or as ordered by the Engineer, Materials: Not specified. Construction Details: The Contractor shall remove ~he pavement in a neat workmanlike manner by any suitable means that does mot damage the adjacent pavement or existing underground utilities. Sawing to neat lines will be required before the removal of concrete pavement. This work must conform to the details shown on the plans. The removed concrete shall be properly dis- posed of by the Contractor, off the right-of-way as appreved by the Engineer. Method of Measurement: Pavement Excavation shall bm ~easured by the number of square yards of pavement removed and disposed of as shown on the plans or ordered by the Engineer. Basis of Payment: The unit price bid per sque~ yard for this item shall include the cost of furnishing all labor, materials, and equipment necessary to remove and dispose of the pavement, mesh reinforcement, transverse joints, and longitudinal ties except that saw cutting will bbs paid for under the appropriate item. Payment shall be the same regardless of whether the entire thickness of pave- ment is remmved or simply the top surface of pavememt is removed to provide a transition for resurfacing. 10608.0103 - CONCRETE DRIVEWAYS - CLA~S F Description- ~he work snail, consist, of C; construction of portland cemen~ concrete d~zveways shown =he plans or as specified by =he ~gineer. a 1 . except that =he portland cem~ PP Y ior Class "F' concze=s ~n section with the specifica:lons ......... te shall pro~r=ioned ~ accord~ce wi~ ~e aggreg,ate Class "F" concre~ ~ T~le 501-3, Con,crete p ficatlons shall apply ~cept ~e c: g P days at all o~ t~es. Me.od o~ ~as~ent. ~is work ~all l~es sh~n on ~e plus or as ordere~ by ,~e E~g~eer. Basis of Pa~en~. ~e ~it ~rice biff ~ ~clude all ~cavation, prep~ation of for re.force.t, ~ all o~er ~t~ials~, ~i~ent,.~ l~or necess~y to co~lete ~e work as plus or specified by ~e ~g~e~. Payment at =he unit hid price will be made~ after the concrete d~iveways and curing applacatlon have been% properly placed~ TOP OF PROP.-~ ~ PAV'T, .A 221//2' DETAIL CONCRETE CURB TYPE A ITEM 0609,2 80 THE END OF CURB NOT ABUTTING EXISTING CURB SHALL BE RAMPED DOWN TO :ZERO HEIGHT REVEAL IN THE LAST 10 FEET AT LOCATIONS FACING TRAFFIC. EXIST. PAV'7 WIDTH AS DETERMINED BY REGIONAL PERMIT ENG, -- SEE APPROPRIATE DETAIL FOR MEETING EXIST. PAWL !/4"/FT, (SEE NOIE 2) 17304,1011 (6") --ITEM 403.11 [6') (2 LIFTS} ITEM 403,13 (l~/t'') ITEM 403.1701 (l~/t'') ITEM 203,01 SEE NOTE I BELOW TYPICAL SECTION ASPHALT PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION NOTE: DEPTH 70 BE INCREASED BY REGIONAL PERMIT ENG, TO 8' (3 LIFTS) IN AREAS WITH HIGH TRUCK TRAFFIC ASPHALT PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION ITEM DESCRIPTION 203.01 17304,1011 403.11 403.13 403.1701 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION AND EMBANKMENT SUBBASE COURSE - TYPE 1011 ASPHALT CONCRETE - TYPE 1 BASE COURSE ASPHALT CONCRETE - TYPE 3 BINDER COURSE ASPHALT CONCRETE - TYPE 6F TOP COURSE (HIGH FRICTION) MARSHALL DESIGN NOTES: ASPHALT PAVEMENT WIDENINGS WILL ONLY BE PERMITTED ADJACENT TO EXISTING FULL DEPTH ASPHALT PAVEMENT. WHERE THE. EXISTING PAVEUENT IS CONCRETE. CONCRETE WIDENING MUST BE USED. WHERE THE EXISTING PAVEMENT IS COMPOSITE, A COMPOSITE WIDENING MUST BE CONSTRUCTED, WHERE THE EXISTING PAVEMENT CROSS-SLOPE IS DIFFERENT FROM t/4" PER FOOT, THE PROPOSED PAVEMENT SLOPE SHALL MATCH THE EXISTING PROVIDED THE SLOPE WILL BE ~"/FT, MINIMUM AND ~"/FT. MAXIMUM. WHERE A SLOPE WITHIN THIS RANGE CANNOT BE OBTAINED, RESURFACING OF THE EXISTING ROADWAY TO CORRECT ITS CROSS-SLOPE MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE REGIONAL PERMIT ENGINEER. //--EXIST, PAV'T, 2 / TOP BINDER BASE SUBBASE 10403.0903 FULL DETAIL DEPTH) MEETING EXIST. ASPHALT PAV'T. (NO RESURFACING) o. O- CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 PROJECT #9916 ROBERT LI/ND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS~ LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE I-IARRI~T PARKWAY N~NEAPOLIS, ~N 55409 612.927.0680 FkX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX ! 134 WMNSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 All idea~, d~stgtt% arrangementa and plans tndicated or represented SCALE DRAWING NYT-541 NYT-542 EDGE OF PAVEMENT MA N RO NYT-545 EDGE OF PAVEMENT NYT-546 F.H. I / / "--.. o.w.~ N 't'h2-2' 20" 162 RAPE W,ES (T¥ ICAU , I / t / / / ~ 24.1 (66.00' GRAPE VINES LILCO-175 WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY) LILCO-174 OF PAVEMENT '°~ LILCO 172 --~ °51 ' "E N49 \ O-¥P~CAL) P 25Y8-- N N EXIST. SAN. SYS. TO BE REMOVED MAI 24.6 24.9 N CURB_ T 25.7 ~ --~ B 25.2 25.5 25.0 T B 25.0 24.5 24.B~ 24.3 95.0 I GRAVEL' 'iT 22 '~GR .q m ~ < I "'FFiFL.'~ 24.'50. X HEADXO TO BE TASTI N G I BA FI N BT 23.8 23.3 T 238 B 23.3 3.5 \ x !3.0 .1 23. 23.8 / / t ~ / P 2C t / / 30" M~ / LNUTS P 2.2 P 22.6~ 24,4 GARAGE 23.0 22.5 P20.8 ? P 21.8 22,~b I .~, . 23.2 22.~ . 57 14.4 CORRAL P 24.2 Z~F,I E ~- ZONE R-80 27.5 + I I ZONING BOUNDARY LiNE r. Fu. 23.510 I + 23..3 26 231.3,+` 24.4 I F.FL. 2[4.50 "ix \ \ 4,5 P 24.2 LEC0-175 ~0, " P&R FENCE /~"~ " 14.8' SOUTH S¥S ~ .4 P~ )_0.3 P 20.5 COY. ~OOD PORCH 32.4 8.1¼ ~ ~ 6.0 1.'5 `'Cf' .0 > 66.4 2 STORY FRAME BARN GT P 21.7 ~PLE f/ PROP. SAN. N N \ 35'11 M, \ C~ \ [] ~XIST. SAN. SYS.x- / TQ BE REMOVED 52.1 14.1 \ \ \ 49 31 'O0"W MANHOLE EL. 16.93 3.9 TREE / / \ \ \ X \ \ \ \ \ 9 C~)NC PAD N \ \ \ p AP, KlNG \ \ \ 21 / / / / / \ h \ \ \ C.B, EP 15.6 17.0 'k [CRA~VEL PAR, KiNG P 16.7 OVERHANG ~ 16.7 FRUIT STAND ~. ~ 26,0 P 16.7 TO BE REMOVED x GR -. ~/. N \ Z \ Fq -( \ / / / \ \ \ \ \ 0 EDGE OF PAVEMENT / I \ 0 k \ / / k k / FN¢ C.M. CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutcb.ogae, NY 11935 PROJECT #9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4829 EAST LAKB HAPdllB T PARKWAY MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612 927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 by thts drawing are owned by and the propeny of Robert Lund SCALE: l" = 20,00' ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION \ x, N N DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS: SANITARY CALCULATIONS: ~l~l~dN~,r&C~.qEAm SANITAEy 10 GPD>/~EAT = 460 GeD SURVEY, GRAXE)ING, SANITARY SYSTEMS AND DRAINAG~E SYSTEMS DESIGNED BY BURTON, BEHRIE~IDT, SMITH PC ENGINEERS, ARCH41TECTS SURVEYORS \ 80\ \ 120 160 ? SCALE:f" =/20' / / N N N N N I DKAWING PLANT SCHEDULE: ~YB. QTY. BOTANICAL NAME .AR 17 ]BN ' 3 'CC 3 PS IO QP _ 17 COMMON NAME SIZE Amelm:cl,.ier canademsis Shadbush 8'- 10' A. x. grand[flora "Auturan Brillance" Auturan Brillanee Sorvioeberr 8.'-I0' Acer grlseum A. rchram 'Autumn Flame' A. mbmm 'Autumn Flame' Betula ni~a 'Heritage' Cercis canadensis P. sylve;tris Quercus pfilustrls Pap~bark Maple 2-1/2"-3" Autumn Flame Red Maple 2"-2-1/2" .AuturanFlame Red Maple. 5"-6" cai. Heritage River Birch 8'-10' Redbud 2"-2-1/2" Scotch Pine 7'-$' Fm Oak 2"-2-1/2" ./ COMME-I~YS-"[ ....... :' _tY~. Multistem Single Stem M~fi~em QTY. _.__ BOTANICAL NAME ~hrubs: ~A 13 ~D 43 EA 3 I-]iVI 142 LF 3 ~vn? 3 RE 5 RI~ 36 SYB. QTY. Vines: .Groundcovers: o U -4 .-f t )~ AU 123 GO 97 '.HS 473 LS ~ 3'20 ~T I3.4 flats Cor~us alba 'Siberiea' Cotoneaster dammeri 'Lowfast' Euenymus alatus 'Compactus' H. macropkylla 2,rddm Blue' Leucothoe axallarls Myrica permsyNanica Pmnus mafifima l~ododandron earolinianum R. 'Olga Mezirt' Rosa rugosa 'Alba' BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE COMMENTS Tar~arhn Dogwood 3 gal. Lowfast Cotoneaster I5"-18" spread Dwarf Winged Burning Bush 30"-36" IqLkko Blue Hydrangea 3 gal. Coast Leueothoe 2 gal. Bayberry 3 gal Beach Plum 5 gal. Carolina Ritododendron 5 gal. Olga Mezitt Rimdodandron 3 gal. White Rugosa Rose 24"-30" COMMON NAME SIZE COMMENTS Hydrangea anomala sub.petinlad Climbing Hydrangea Arctostaphylos Uva-ursi Ga~ium oderatum Hemerocallis 'Stalla D'Oro' /asminum nudiflomm Liriope spieata Pachysandra terminalis Bearberry Sweet Woodruff Stoma D'Oro Daylily Wi~t er Jasmine Cre,eping Lilyturf Spnurge 5 gal. 4" pot 2-1/2 Qt. 2-1/2 Qt. 2-I/2 Qt. 4" pot 100/flat -/ :LIGHT FIXTUR~ INDEX: S~)~boll Type 'Manufacturer CONSTRUCTION' DRAW/NOS FOR: Tasting Barn Pecgni¢ BaY WAnery Main Rdad (Rome 25) Cutchogue, ~ 11935 ~PRDJECT #991S ROBERT LUND ASSOCIkTES ARCHri'ECTS, LTD. ~0LIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 516.537.5500 FaX .516.725A478 R~lrafion Nnm!~ 013599. DATE DESCRJPTION 4 SCALE ISSUE# TREE OR B u ~ L nlNG SURFACE- ~IOIJNTED ADJUSTABLE ~ PATH LIG~ WiTH ~-G~E ~C~ON~OX PORTABI,E SPEAR MOUNTED ,J~) PARKING STATISTICS A REGULATIONS:_ ~ ghfi~,k'_cltt'~70iVtH1201: ', With F~ed'ltood. l~I-C~;I Medi~ to Car Raflo:[ KlM Lighting, BR'~I; 100A21/I~, 120V, Verde Fating. Focus Lmidscal~e Lighting, SL-08-TI0-NL, 120V, Cast Louvered Brick Light, Black. KlM IAghth~g, EL720BL~ 75PAR30/NFL & J-25N Spear Mount, with Glare Shield. 2,726.5 S.F. / 67 = 40.7 S.F. / Spaae Proposed! Trees per Median; (1) One 2 Caliper Tree / 10 Sp~ces Min: 67 / 10 = 6.7 Trees Required.. (12) 2" - 2-1/2" Caliper Tree8 Proposed. ANGELA W. FOWLER - Land~cape Architect , (Consultant: Planting Plan) 39 West 3St0 Street, Suite #10C New York, N.Y. 10018 Tel: (212) 391-9699 ' Fax:.(212) 944-131~ Project Title: PECON!C BAY WINERy Cutchogue, New york ProiectNo.: .- #003.00 Drawing Title: Planting Plan Date: -Scale: DraWing No.: 1/8" ALUMINUM PABEL -- SCREEN PRINT SYMBOL HANDICAPPED SYMBOL 2" SQ. ALUMINUM POST FINISH AS PER ~PECIFICATIONS FINISH GRADE EARTH CONCR,ETE FOOTING GRID FOR LAYOUT ONLY ONE BQUARE EQUALS 4"x 36" X 12" A-21 Incandescent 'SPECIFfCAT]ONS Hood: Spun ceppe~ supper~ed on brass rods, Husk: Casl bronze Natural copper See Ba~e 3 OeitJficat~on: UL U S ar d Canadian sal¢l~ employ a quailly prp§r~m hag s audited to IS0980~ / ED-17 I~eta[ Halide / CFL1 EL720 120 Vblt Die~C'ast Ah BN7~I / BR72 C ANGELA W. FOWLER - Landscape Architect (Consultant: Planting Plan) 39. West 38!a Street, suite #10C N~ew'Yorlq N.Y. 10018 Tel: (212) 391-9699 Fax: (212) 944-1313 Proiect ~tle: PECONIC BAY WINERY Cutchogue, New York proiect No.: #010~3.00 'Drrawing Title: D~te: Scale: L.(} 202' 9 41'' '~ fI~1 - ~ e,~ ~ -~ I ,,11 ' r---; ! MAIN FLOOR- KEY PLAN L J 4~'-¢" ~ 3~'-4~' 22L4 ~" G3L3" 23'-2 23 IL3" CONSTRUCTION DRAW]NOS FOR: Tasting Bam Peconic Bay Winep/ Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 PRO~ECT #9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE I~MRRI]~T PARKWAY MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O, BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 SCALE: 118"= IL0" ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION 25, ~o¼" 20'-5¼" 7'-al" 203L I ]" 75'-2" 50L7 ½" FOUNDATION - KEY FLAb 47L4'' 22L4 ~" 25 I '-3 ½" 23'-2½" 2g,_4,I 19L9½" DRAWING 1 ROOff - KEY PLAN 203'-5~" L OPEN T 58'-0" 3 1'-3z~" TADT[NG ROOM 22'-4½" 203L54~. TERRACE ® ® ® 59'-2 4~" 50UT~I GALLERY MEN'S PC)OM ® ® 2 SECOND FLOOR- KEY PLAN 104 CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road ~Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 PROJECT ~9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE HARIdET PARKWAY MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725,4478 I here[9, c~rhJ~, that thisplan, specification, or report wasprepared SCALE: 1/8" = IL0'' ISSUE # DATE DESCIUPTION DRAWING 25'-4" 4'-2¼" ,2'-0~" 4'-2¼" r~.4'-2 ¼"t ~ 2'-0~" 78,' 2 ¼" / ? ? / 14r- 'X \ \ \ \ \ CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutehogue, NY 11935 PROJECT #9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4829 EAST LAI~E HARRIET PARKWAY MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 All ideas, dexigns, arl~ngements andplans tndlcated or represented by this drawing ar~ owned by and the property of Robert Lund dssoclates Architects, Ltd, and were created, evolved and developed for Itse on. and in connecaon with the ~pecific project None of dtsclosed to a~ty person, fi~vn, or eorpora~on for any pu~ose whatsoever wtthout written permission of Robert Lund Associates ~lrchitect& Ltd, I hereby cerliJ~ that this plan, specificatiott, or report was prepared Registered Archltect ttnder the laws of the State of New York. SCALE: 1/4" = 1LO" ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION F'ECO0 02~.04 AUG. 4, 2000 51TE PlAN APPUCATI©N MAIN DARN 14L7~'' FOUNDATION ?LAN 44L¢" b b I G'-7½" 23'-2 ~" \ \ 7'-6½" b L_ f-- J 'x 2GL4'' · r h ¼ / / I ;Z OFFICE OFFICE COP~ ROOiX t II OFFICE RESTROOM 4'-0" 30L I O ~'' ~ ~ERVICE C- )RRI DOR ELEV. MACHINE ROOM ELEV. iI b I I I 3L I 0" 6'-8 ~" I © 3'-6¼" STORAGE I I RETAI L i I I 9'-0" ILO (E) ',,/ 3L I O" -b 25L2 ~" 14'_74~'' i 0'-4" ELEVATOR LOBBY (~ MEN'5 5TORAGE ROOM 2G'-O" % ELEV. I 2L I I ~' 8 5'- I" I 0'-4" 5'-~" CONSTRUCTION DPokW~NGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 PROJECT #9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE HARRIET PARKWAY MINNEAPOLIS, ivlN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 by this drawing are owned by and the property of Robert Lund SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" ¢ ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION PECO0,OO,04 AUG, 4, 2000 DITE PLAN APPLICATION LAV, LAV. 23' 2 ½" (~)ELEV. MECH. RM. WOMEN'5 ROOM 1 DRAWING t TERRACE 21 5TOP-,AGE 22'-4 ~" G'-4" 3'-3" G'-4" 3'-3" G'-2" G'-4" 3'-11½" TASTI N G ROOM 14'-~o3' WINE R.O. R.O. b SOUTH GALLERY Iq 21'' WOMEN'; ROOM MEN'5I ROOM 33'-44~'' ' CONSTRUCTION DIL~WINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogu¢, NY 11935 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, LTD. MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 S'ie ½" 15'-8¢" -t STORAGE 26'~8" OFFICE R.O. R.O. 3v-~" ~,_~¢,, 59'-2 ~4" b MAIN DARN - .SECOND FLOOR / DRAWING 30'-} J CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 PROJECT #9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE I4ARRIET PARKWAY MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 by tMs drawing are owned by and fha proper~ of Robert Lund Date RegiCradon Number 013599 SCALE: 1/4"= 1LO'' ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION EeCOO.O~5 04 AUG. 4. 2000 SITE PLAN APPLICATION 5HIPPING ANNEX- SECOND FLOOR PLAN 77'-G" 2b'-O" 45'-7 ~" 5L¢', 7'-4" I 2'-10¼" 3'-G-}" I 2'-`54~'' 3'-G ¼" 2 32 DELIVERY I `5L`5" 22'-4" b 30'- I O' DUMPSTER AREA -Tm PACKING SHIPPING rD 2'-2½" 47'-4" 4G'-3 ~" 4'-2¼" 12'-02" 4'-2 ¼" Z r/, I ('U N EXCAVATED',-/I 7'-5" ?1 ; O" I 2'-,5" I0~ U '"' XCA~AT, ED , I 1 '-2"- /5'-2" NEXCAVATED-~,~ I '-4 22'-0" N 3L`5'' 4'- I 0" ~ this Projeect, or for completion of this Project by others 61JIPPING ANNEX- FIRST FLOOR PLAN 3 5HIPPING ANNEX - FOUNDATION PLAN DRAWING CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogu¢, N~ 11935 PROZECT #9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS~ LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE IL, kRP~ET PARKWAY M~INEAPOLI8, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612,927.0382 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 ISSUE # DATE DESCRLPTION t vi_ ,L~ 7 CONSTRUCTION DRAV~lqGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutehogae, NY 11935 PROJECT #9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE HARRIET PAIEKWAY MIBK'x~EA~OLIS, ivlN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WA~NSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516.725.4478 SCALE DESCPJPTION Z '4 3)i 1 DRAWING h I CONSTRUCTiON DRAWINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS. LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE HARRIET PARKWAY MI3FNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FA~ 516.725.4478 All idea~, designs, a~'~angements and plans indicated or represented by thl~ drawing are owned by and the properly of Robert Lurid Associates Architects, Ltd. and wem created, evolved and d~veloped for l~e on, and in connection with the specie project. None of such ideas, designs, amangements or p[an~ shall be used by or disclosed to any person, flrm, or co~oration for any purpose whatsoe~er without wHtlen permission of Robert £und Associate~ SCALE ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION T I I CONSTRUCTION DRAW~]qGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 PROJECT #9916 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS~ LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE ~T PARKWAY MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612,927~0382 P.O. BOX 1134 WAINSCOTT, NY 11975 516.537.5500 FAX 516,725.4478 for use on, and in connecnon with the specifle project. None of SCALE' I/Z~~ ~ II-c~v, ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION A'I5 DRAWING .I- % L1 CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Wine~.~ Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, LTD. P.O. BOX 1134 WA1NSCOTT, NY 11975 SCALE I[4o: IL~ (~a F~ L~ A-14 DRAWING rI L~ CONSTRUCTION DRAWfNOS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 1 I935 ~OLIS, MN 55409 P.O. BOX 1134 SCALE J/4~'-- ]t-O~ A'lo DRAWING CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR: Tasting Barn Peconic Bay Winery Main Road (Route 25) Cutchogue, NY 11935 ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCtt£fgCTS, LTD. 4829 EAST LAKE ~T PARKWAY MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55409 612.927.0680 FAX 612.927.0382 P.O. BOX 1134 SCALE I/~." = 1 DRAWING